9/11

^^^ THIS ^^^ Trouble is common sense isn't allowed in this thread !

 

It was necessary for the towers to fall to create the drive necessary to involve us in war in the middle east. If a couple of planes had just hit and ten people had died it would have been nothing. The whole point was to create a spectacle so dramatic it could be used as an excuse for anything. The scary part is that it is obvious that buildings won't collapse like that, it has been pointed out, and there's nothing we can do. What risk of being found out? There have been real false flag operations and thirty years later when it gets leaked, no one gets in trouble.

 

witness account saying they passed the floors with the fires . had they been that intense.
human sacrifice has just evolved from ripping out hearts and holding them to thr sky.

 

Ok, since you keep repeating this, we will move on to the next part thats going to mess with your head.

Lets start with "lateral ejection of contents", for our casual reader, lateral means sideways

Now a reminder, we are talking 17 years later.

And you said all the concrete was pulverized, eye witness accounts of everyone on the ground apparently about the pulverization of all the concrete.

Entropy is the degree of disorder or randomness in the system, and it scales in 2D, not 3D, that is surface area not volume. In this case the way stuff spreads out, NOT the velocity at which it spreads out.

Within each floor, just as the buildings had been finished, before all the office furniture and people had moved in. By volume, what takes up most of each floor is air as I said before, next most common thing by volume and certainly by surface area, is not steel or concrete, its drywall.

Gypsum slabs 2 inches thick, 4 deep around the elevator shafts, lining all the walls, fireproofing panels floor to ceiling for every partition along with accompanying gypsum drywall slats.

SFRM foam was required to be just as thick as the steel it was covering, so thats around the same volume as all the steel, three times the surface area.

The shape of those giagantic dust clouds has to do with entropy, the way its spreads out, different to its velocity. But with its shape and velocity "they" can work out what its mostly comprised of.

Your contents laterally projected comprises of mostly what. The dust clouds comprise if mostly what. All the eyewitnesses on the ground you say said they were sure about the pulverized what?

 

The reason I repeat it is because you repeatedly deny that the descent of the upper block would have been affected by the intact core structure below it. As I said, you believe that the upper block would just fall right through the rest of the Tower. That's why you refuse to answer the question of how far the upper block would have fallen in 5 seconds had the rest of the Tower below been removed from the equation. You understand quite well how close your answer would be to how far it fell with the rest of the intact Tower below. Then you'd have to make up some strange reason why the Tower below offered the same resistance as air. I understand why you want to talk past that issue, but you really can't. I'm beginning to think that you were bullshitting about that, too.

Also, I didn't say that all of the witnesses on the ground said anything. I provided you with a video of them describing ground zero. You heard it from them. So what do you want to say about the concrete that would contradict the people who were there?

Go ahead and pick'em apart:





And by the way, could you cite the segment from the NIST report that you say states that "Theres no singular defined "upper block" once everything starts to give way." I'm beginning to think that that claim was bullshit, too.

 

If the rest of the block had been taken away?

You havent got everything right in your head. If you wanted to try prove your "intact core structure" provided a lot of resistance. The answer would NOT be close compared to free fall with air resistance, it would be the opposite, it would retard the fall.

But again, you seem to have no idea what load that lower part can handle, what the retarding force you think should be.

You are treating the upper and lower blocks as single entities which is nonsense.

You arent going to get precision off a youtube video and why on earth 5 seconds.

5 seconds the upper floors have disintetgrated. What gard-damn upper block????

I can only answer that question if you tell me what you think that retarding force from the lower block should be.DO YOU GET it?

 

no way the core to crumble all the way down. it really is controlled. sadly . nothing anyone can do about it.

 

Yes, I've asked you this numerous times. And you still won't answer. And it appears that you believe that one way to get out of answering it is to pretend that you don't understand what I mean when I ask you how far the upper block would fall in 5 seconds if the rest of the Tower wasn't there to interfere with its descent. It's like you don't believe that the upper block didn't fall onto the Tower's structure below.

However, you yourself said: "Yes, it was supposed to go through it like custard, 4 million kilograms of weight just for one floor, 44 million kilograms for 11 floors. That drops 6 floors, the force is already 50 times the load the floor it drops onto can carry."

You claim a 6-floor drop, but now refuse to acknowledge the 6-floor space between the upper and lower block. What's up with that?

We'll get into your habit of focusing on only the floors when considering resistance to the upper block later.

 

Yes, thats the force of the weight of the top floors, 4 million kilograms per floor. Not intact

 

Anyway, energy required to squish and laterally eject gypsum dry wall.

Any of our casual viewers that have ever worked with drywall....well....

 

Uh huh.

So you're not denying that the upper block--the one you don't believe in--dropped 6-floors before colliding with the rest of the perimeter and core structure below it?

 

You say that as if the presence of drywall somehow explains why the upper block descended through the intact structure below it without even a jolt for at least the first 360 feet in 5 seconds, which is just 40 feet shy of freefall.

So how far do you calculate the upper block would have fallen in 5 seconds without the rest of the Tower below?

 

It can if you invoke segments of the FEMA and NIST reports that don't really exist.

 

No, Im saying most of your laterally ejected contents is drywall, the energy required to do that insignificant to the weight of steel and concrete coming down, insignificant to the load the floors below could not handle

 

Stop stalling, thats got nothing to do with anything.

Total force down vs total force up, thats all it comes down to. Not only does your "intact core structure" not retard shit, the collapse speeds up as it goes down, 120mph near the bottom, like a god damn heavy knife through butter

 

Steel = hardly butter

 

For Some Reason I Could Only Watch A Few Seconds Of That Vid......



Cheers Glen.

 

5:50 for wtc 1 collapse