| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 6:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | Top to bottom collapse, approx 9 secs. (NIST figure). |
Seriously, mate, you might want to see a head-shrinker. Your addiction to misrepresentation seems to be getting worse.
This quote from NIST was in the post you quoted:
| Quote: | | NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. |
Is this getting through?
First debris to strike ground, approx 9 secs. (NIST figure)
is very different from
Top to bottom collapse, approx 9 secs. (CT figure) |
The split second difference between your take on 'approx 9 seconds' and mine is really all the point you can make here? Ohhh dear. |
The time between the first debris striking the ground and the top of the building striking the ground was a "split second"? Prove it.
NIST does not assert a top to bottom collapse time of "approx 9 secs." That is your misrepresentation.
If you don't think getting the time right is critical to making your case, consider that for every fraction shaved off the downward acceleration, you get a tremendous increase in energy available for other work. |
Very hard to tell what's going on behind all that dust visually.
This clarifies events better:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | |
OK I did a touch of research. You need to bear in mind that the 47 columns that constituted the core of each tower were driven right down to the bedrock of Manhattan Island.
You will note on the diagram that after the spikes for the supposed collapses of the towers there still seems to be activity. The spikes may in fact be the effect of explosions in the basement of each tower. The collapses are the minor shock waves that can be seen after the spikes. It is even possible that the north tower collapse may have actually fallen as much as 17 seconds after the spike recorded as it's collapse time.
Download this paper to for more insight (right click and save):
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | | chek wrote: | |
OK I did a touch of research. You need to bear in mind that the 47 columns that constituted the core of each tower were driven right down to the bedrock of Manhattan Island.
You will note on the diagram that after the spikes for the supposed collapses of the towers there still seems to be activity. The spikes may in fact be the effect of explosions in the basement of each tower. The collapses are the minor shock waves that can be seen after the spikes. It is even possible that the north tower collapse may have actually fallen as much as 17 seconds after the spike recorded as it's collapse time.
Download this paper to for more insight (right click and save): |
Yes, that paper was so insightful that I spewed my morning tea all over my keyboard. Here is a sentence from the paper's conclusion:
| Quote: |
THEREFORE, the facts in this paper, which pertain directly to the greatest crime and conspiracy of modern times, demand a new independent, quasi private/public, non-politicized 9/11 investigation (a real one this time, one with teeth) be formed immediately to pursue this crime investigation until the murderers / conspirators are identified, apprehended, and brought to justice.
|
So the investigation needs to be:
1. Independent
2. Quasi Private/Public
4. Real
5. With teeth
Also, I couldn't help noticing that this paper in no way supports what you are saying about the seismic data from the collapse. It merely states the author's pet theory that the perps detonated explosives in the basement of the WTC, and this was what appeared on the seismograph rather than the airliner impacts. These explosives were apparently extremely ineffective, only able to blow off the elevator doors. I am not sure why any conspirator would go to such great risk to accomplish absolutely nothing. Remember, the more people involved, the more likely the conspiracy will be uncovered. This conspiracy is beginning to look like it was designed by committee, with the participants unable to agree on how the towers would be destroyed.
Explosives in the basement were ineffective in the first WTC attack in the 90's. Why make the same attempt again, this time with explosives only capable of ruining the elevators? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | Top to bottom collapse, approx 9 secs. (NIST figure). |
Seriously, mate, you might want to see a head-shrinker. Your addiction to misrepresentation seems to be getting worse.
This quote from NIST was in the post you quoted:
| Quote: | | NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. |
Is this getting through?
First debris to strike ground, approx 9 secs. (NIST figure)
is very different from
Top to bottom collapse, approx 9 secs. (CT figure) |
The split second difference between your take on 'approx 9 seconds' and mine is really all the point you can make here? Ohhh dear. |
The time between the first debris striking the ground and the top of the building striking the ground was a "split second"? Prove it.
NIST does not assert a top to bottom collapse time of "approx 9 secs." That is your misrepresentation.
If you don't think getting the time right is critical to making your case, consider that for every fraction shaved off the downward acceleration, you get a tremendous increase in energy available for other work. |
Very hard to tell what's going on behind all that dust visually.
This clarifies events better:
|
How does it clarify things for you? Based on this graphic, what is your conclusion about the collapse times?
The Scholars seem to be uncertain whether this graphic shows the collapse at all. What would your response be to the paper Patrick linked to?
_________________
"They, the jews, also have this thing about linage don't they?
We know a person from recent history who had a thing for linage and gene pools don't we?"
--Patrick Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Sharp Major
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 237
Location: In the van with the blacked out windows, parked outside your home.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kbo234 said
| Quote: | | A Sharp Major attacks the way I typed the relevant formula. Here is a formidable thinker who really sees to the heart of these matters. |
At the heart of these matters (the heart of the 9/11 Truth Movement) are a bunch of guys (usually) with no engineering education or experience who are telling professional engineers that they are wrong. My comments on your presentation are my way of drawing attention to your shortcomings in an area in which you claim expertise. Do you really think you can get away with presenting t2 in lieu of t² or t^2? And that’s for starters.
I did not ‘attack’ you. Go easy on the emotive language of the victim. I criticised you. You deserve it.
_________________
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies.” Mike Royko
http://www.screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | chipmunk stew wrote: | | chek wrote: | | Top to bottom collapse, approx 9 secs. (NIST figure). |
Seriously, mate, you might want to see a head-shrinker. Your addiction to misrepresentation seems to be getting worse.
This quote from NIST was in the post you quoted:
| Quote: | | NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. |
Is this getting through?
First debris to strike ground, approx 9 secs. (NIST figure)
is very different from
Top to bottom collapse, approx 9 secs. (CT figure) |
The split second difference between your take on 'approx 9 seconds' and mine is really all the point you can make here? Ohhh dear. |
The time between the first debris striking the ground and the top of the building striking the ground was a "split second"? Prove it.
NIST does not assert a top to bottom collapse time of "approx 9 secs." That is your misrepresentation.
If you don't think getting the time right is critical to making your case, consider that for every fraction shaved off the downward acceleration, you get a tremendous increase in energy available for other work. |
Very hard to tell what's going on behind all that dust visually.
This clarifies events better:
|
How does it clarify things for you? Based on this graphic, what is your conclusion about the collapse times?
The Scholars seem to be uncertain whether this graphic shows the collapse at all. What would your response be to the paper Patrick linked to? |
CS I saw your response 'compression artefacts' on another thread just now, and when I saw this 'response' here, I regret a huge wave of existential boredom overcame me. Sorry.
What are those above?
Wavy coloured lines.
Don't worry about them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
heart-earth
Suspended
Joined: 21 Oct 2006
Posts: 31
Location: M DNA ARK
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject: Re: now its november |
|
|
| heart-earth wrote: | The time for despair,mistrust,frustration and hopelessness will now rain down on all of us, making it ever so vital that people seeking the truth do react on their most loving feelings and not the evil of all evil:personal pride.
We dont need to question our believes anymore. |
And what happends
_________________
"you can fool some people sometimes,
but you can`t fool all the people all the time." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
