9/11

Think i will wait until september 2019, when this thread fires back up again, everyone can go back seeing how many pages you put "whole" in capital letters, pretending their is no mention in the report.

Then I will copy and paste it, 2020 maybe

 

Yeah....and?

90th floor through to the 99th floor by the looks of things on that Sauret video, thats the first section to give way, looking from that direction. A second before the top of the tower even moves. And thats the view from the outside. Internally you would have had those trusses and columns start to fail a few seconds before that. So initiation of the collapse is 3, 4 seconds before you say, and you look at that other video, from thetime the top of the tower starts to move until tjos bottom floors collapse is about 20 seconds, then another 10 to 15 seconds for those left over steel columns to fall.

Any talk of close to freefall or virtual freefall is irrelevant

And you still want to keep going even though 40 pages later, yes i went back and checked, all this starts about page 18 of this thread, you still want to keep going even though I just pointed out NO ONE EVER CLAIMED THE BUILDING COLLAPSED IN 11 SECONDS

 

Hmmm . . .

Post #1119:

You said: "That is, that would be the same FEMA report that says the WHOLE structural intergrity of wtc 1, including all the columns in that " intact core structure" were compromised by the collapse of wtc 2."
______________________________________________________________

I've been copying and pasting that directly from the post that you composed. Now it's not so much a mystery how you could believe that the FEMA report said such a thing; you don't even remember that it was you who said it and used caps for the word "whole."

 

You keep talking about the time it took for the Tower to collapse. My point has always been centered on the first five seconds of the collapse.

The antenna was supported by the hat truss. The hat truss was tied into both the core and perimeter columns. When the antenna started to drop, that means that the whole upper block was moving.

 

No it doesnt, read the bloomin NIST report. Theres no singular defined "upper block" once everything starts to give way.

Still no clear view on what you are trying to prove/disprove. The buildings didnt fall down, must have been assisted by secret CIA vegemite, a cloaked Klingon bird of prey? What?

 

Tis 7-40 am Here......Just About To Make Coffee And Vegemite On Toast For Brekkie......Lets Wait And See

If The Vegemite Brings Moi Crashing Down.....



Cheers Glen.

 

Of course there was a defined upper block. You've said so yourself.

And you'll have to forgive me for asking you to cite the segment from the NIST report that states that "Theres no singular defined "upper block" once everything starts to give way. After all, you've already been caught attributing a claim that the WHOLE structural intergrity of wtc 1, including all the columns in that " intact core structure" were compromised by the collapse of wtc 2" to the FEMA report when it wasn't really there.

Actually, if the NIST did make that claim, we can infer from it that there was a defined upper block before collapse. So . . .

 

Sargent Shultz mode again.

Ok, we will do this again, video from the hudson, outside of building falls, within 2 seconds antenna has seperated starts to fall to the right as well as down, at 5 seconds most of the top of the buliding doesnt exist anymore

 

not really a coincidence because common air play, but clicked on the last video and dust in the wind come over my stream music channel..

 

Well you have a problem, then. If the upper block doesn't exist after 5 seconds, then what is crushing the core and perimeter columns below?

Since you believe that the upper block fell 6 floors before colliding with the core structure below it, how can you now sit there and try to make an argument that there was no distinct upper block?

Also, could you provide the segment of the NIST report that states that "Theres no singular defined "upper block" once everything starts to give way? Thanks in advance.

 

Just a coincidence, I'm sure, but I happen to be able to play Dust in the Wind on my guitar. Also just another coincidence, I'm sure, is that Smoke on the Water is playing on my oldies station.

 

could only play ditw on 12 string.

anyways .. yinz not discuss the crater very much. where chunk a building come down on building 6.

 

I play it on a six-string because . . . I'm not picky like some people.

Go ahead and make a case about the crater. And then wait. I'm pretty sure that before long, somebody'll jump your ass, sure as shitt.

I believe that whatever happened to WTC #6 is captured on this video:

 

So this is what I have been waiting forty pages for?

Its not all intact, but its still falling down, doesnt have to be all in one piece to fall on shit, impart most of that force downwards, the more floors crumble, the greater that force is, heading mostly downwards. By the time you get to 5 seconds you are past the impact point of the aircraft, you have somewhere between the 70th and 80th floors getting crushed, and most of everything that previuously existed coming down on the next lot of floors, and so on and so on until it gets to the ground.

Nothing magical happens at 5 seconds man, nothing magical happens when everything coming down hits that 91st floor, if it cant hold it, it cant hold it. Not all the upper part was intact when it fell, not all the lower block was intact before that upper part fell.

Once again, 40 pages of this so far without you knowing what load that "intact core structure" could handle, 17 years not getting how conservation of momentum works.

So you are actually arguing the bottom floors should have stopped that exponentially increasing force from above. So you are arguing either the buiding didnt fall down or those lower floors needed extra help to collapse, now that extra help wouldnt be from well timed thermite now, would it? Or secret government or alien invisible directed energy weapons now would it?

 

You're right, it all doesn't have to be intact to fall on shit. However, the shit that that shit happens to be falling on is an intact core structure, and not just the floors that you're focusing on.

Who said anything about magical happenings at the five second mark? The anomaly occurred right from the get-go when the upper block collided with the intact core structure below it and didn't experience the least little jolt from the collision. And this occurred despite the energy required to break up the intact core structure below it, pulverize contents, laterally eject that pulverized content, and still have enough energy left over to fall through the structure below at virtual freefall speed. You live in a world where energy within a closed system can be used up, and then created again out of nothing at all.

And am I to assume that the NIST report that you said states that "Theres no singular defined "upper block" once everything starts to give way" can be thrown into the same garbage receptacle that the FEMA report that you said states that "the WHOLE structural intergrity of wtc 1, including all the columns in that " intact core structure" were compromised by the collapse of wtc 2" went into?

 

It didnt experience the least little jolt? What the hell man.

But you saw it "laterally eject" a whole bunch of stuff from the sides.

But thats not the least little jolt?

What the hell are you talking about?

 

I've always felt that IF there's any kind of conspiracy, it's more along the lines of the powers that be having intelligence that wasn't acted on.. Or something like that. Surely it wasn't necessary for the towers to fall, to have the impact they would presumably want... So why complicate things by using explosives? And create risk of being found out?

 

Super slow mo

 

Yes, I certainly saw that. Apparently your point here is that the lateral ejection of contents indicates that there was a jolt. But anyone can see that the antenna--which was supported by the hat truss, which was tied into the core and perimeter columns--experienced no jolt as it collided with the rest of the Tower.

I know that you hoped to make a point here with the lateral ejection of Tower contents, but that aspect of the collapse just adds to the energy-sinks that would take away from the available energy to allow for a virtual freefall collapse for the first 360 feet. So we have the energy required to break up the intact core structure below it, pulverize contents, laterally eject the pulverized contents, and still have enough energy left over to fall through the structure below at virtual freefall speed. As I said, you live in a world where energy within a closed system can be used up, and then created again out of nothing at all.

And you never did say--given your understanding of air resistance--how far the upper block would have fallen in 5 seconds without the rest of the Tower below to impede it?

Also, am I to assume that the NIST report that you said states that "Theres no singular defined "upper block" once everything starts to give way" can be thrown into the same garbage receptacle that the FEMA report that you said states that "the WHOLE structural intergrity of wtc 1, including all the columns in that " intact core structure" were compromised by the collapse of wtc 2" went into?

 

What happens at 5 seconds? Does Elvis appear?