| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Still grasping at the old straws then Ignatz?
I for one would love to hear how any number of gashes on the South side (in concert with all that heavy smoke clinging to the North side, of course)
caused simultaneous failure of all those columns in such a way as to make the roof line to drop straight down in a little over 6 seconds.
For the life of me I can't discover any mechanism other than explosives that could make that happen. Progressive collapse it ain't.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hmmm.......... oddly enough i saw a video today that showed part of the left side collapsing long before (relatively) the rest of the building collapsed. i'll see if i can remember where i saw it.
so that chek would put an end to your "simultaneous failure of all those columns in such a way as to make the roof line to drop straight down in a little over 6 seconds." idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | hmmm.......... oddly enough i saw a video today that showed part of the left side collapsing long before (relatively) the rest of the building collapsed. i'll see if i can remember where i saw it.
so that chek would put an end to your "simultaneous failure of all those columns in such a way as to make the roof line to drop straight down in a little over 6 seconds." idea. |
Not at all 'johndoe'.
The (in)famous East penthouse most likely signals the inner core being disabled before the outer columns are taken out.
We already know that you government loyalists try to spin it out to 13 seconds on that basis, but nevertheless, the roofline hits the ground, straight down,and symmetrically in six and a bit seconds, indicating no resistance whatsoever.
Get over it.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well if the core collapsed prior then what resistance would there be? and it seems to end this idea of a symetrical collapse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Far from it - controlled demolition is a sequence of events.
In the final sequence, the outer columns are disabled symmetrically - mostly due to structural failure because the explosives were so intense I'd guess to paraphrase, which is how we observe the outer shell of the building collapse so neatly.
In a little over six seconds, roofline to ground.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"In the final sequence, the outer columns are disabled symmetrically"
wrong. the top of the building is demolished last.
"Far from it - controlled demolition is a sequence of events."
very quick events, not 7 seconds between blasts |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"In the final sequence, the outer columns are disabled symmetrically"
| johndoe wrote: | | "wrong. the top of the building is demolished last. |
As in - he who hits the ground last, is demolished last? I was forgetting how precisely you need to word things for critical brains.
"Far from it - controlled demolition is a sequence of events."
| johndoe wrote: | | "very quick events, not 7 seconds between blasts |
You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building. |
I think the irony meter just went into overload.
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building. |
I think the irony meter just went into overload. |
A stalwart of loyalist denial as ever Pepik.
Pity you picked the wrong side of history though.
Because it's obvious to anyone with eyes to see and Danny Jowenko that WTC7 was a conventional common or garden controlled demolition on a grand scale.
Neither NIST And Their Incredible Non-Stop Cogitations, nor Mark Roberts And His Amazing Selected Evidence changes that.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building. |
I think the irony meter just went into overload. |
A stalwart of loyalist denial as ever Pepik.
Pity you picked the wrong side of history though.
Because it's obvious to anyone with eyes to see and Danny Jowenko that WTC7 was a conventional common or garden controlled demolition on a grand scale.
Neither NIST And Their Incredible Non-Stop Cogitations, nor Mark Roberts And His Amazing Selected Evidence changes that. |
Oh well, let's go round the familiar circuit one more time. Danny Jowenko was misled to an extent about the the video he was watching, and was very unwise to base his comments simply on watching a video. He was just as sure that the collapse of the WTC towers was not due to CD, so are you sure you want to quote him as an authority? The demolition experts who studied the collapse of WTC7 in depth, talking to the people who were there at the time, are Implosion World magazine, who say it was not CD. If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | chek wrote: | | pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building. |
I think the irony meter just went into overload. |
A stalwart of loyalist denial as ever Pepik.
Pity you picked the wrong side of history though.
Because it's obvious to anyone with eyes to see and Danny Jowenko that WTC7 was a conventional common or garden controlled demolition on a grand scale.
Neither NIST And Their Incredible Non-Stop Cogitations, nor Mark Roberts And His Amazing Selected Evidence changes that. |
Oh well, let's go round the familiar circuit one more time. Danny Jowenko was misled to an extent about the the video he was watching, and was very unwise to base his comments simply on watching a video. He was just as sure that the collapse of the WTC towers was not due to CD, so are you sure you want to quote him as an authority? The demolition experts who studied the collapse of WTC7 in depth, talking to the people who were there at the time, are Implosion World magazine, who say it was not CD. If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others. |
My but you are behind the times.
The old standby JREFer meme - or 'lie' as I like to properly call a spade a spade - that Jowenko was 'misled' was discredited weeks if not months ago in a follow up phone interview wid da man.
A product of the more desperate days over at your magician's den, perhaps.
You can listen to it here:
http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/danny_jowenko_022207.mp3
though of course you won't.
And Implosion World? That's the one with even less credibility than Popular Mechanics (A Division of Homeland Security Inc), aint it?
Eyes to see, BW. Eyes to see.
And if you haven't got it by now, you probably never will.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | Bushwacker wrote: | | chek wrote: | | pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building. |
I think the irony meter just went into overload. |
A stalwart of loyalist denial as ever Pepik.
Pity you picked the wrong side of history though.
Because it's obvious to anyone with eyes to see and Danny Jowenko that WTC7 was a conventional common or garden controlled demolition on a grand scale.
Neither NIST And Their Incredible Non-Stop Cogitations, nor Mark Roberts And His Amazing Selected Evidence changes that. |
Oh well, let's go round the familiar circuit one more time. Danny Jowenko was misled to an extent about the the video he was watching, and was very unwise to base his comments simply on watching a video. He was just as sure that the collapse of the WTC towers was not due to CD, so are you sure you want to quote him as an authority? The demolition experts who studied the collapse of WTC7 in depth, talking to the people who were there at the time, are Implosion World magazine, who say it was not CD. If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others. |
My but you are behind the times.
The old standby JREFer meme - or 'lie' as I like to properly call a spade a spade - that Jowenko was 'misled' was discredited weeks if not months ago in a follow up phone interview wid da man.
A product of the more desperate days over at your magician's den, perhaps.
You can listen to it here:
http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/danny_jowenko_022207.mp3
though of course you won't.
And Implosion World? That's the one with even less credibility than Popular Mechanics (A Division of Homeland Security Inc), aint it?
Eyes to see, BW. Eyes to see.
And if you haven't got it by now, you probably never will. |
Well, that's a man with a Dutch accent, but is he Danny Jowenko? Surely his nose is the wrong shape?
OK, let us assume the call is genuine, it shows Mr Jowenko is a stubborn man, and will not easily change his mind, he could not be persuaded that the collapse of the towers was CD, and he would not retract his view of WTC 7. Strangely, the man who rang him did not bother to mention the towers, and neither do you. I wonder why not. As I said, Jowenko was not very wise to give his comments off to the cuff on the basis of watching a video, in either case.
Why has Implosion World no credibility, is it just because it will not fall for your particular fantasy? Or is it because the girl who sells the advertising once went out with the second cousin of the ex-wife of a man who services the boilers at Langley? I am sure you have found some straw to grasp to preserve your comic book view of the world.
No comment on "If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others."? Surely there must be an approved conspiracist answer to this, which is an improvement on immediately trying to switch the discussion to the firemen in the towers, the best that has been done up until now? If not, I shall be very disappointed.
_________________
".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Bushwacker"] | chek wrote: | | Bushwacker wrote: | | chek wrote: | | pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building. |
I think the irony meter just went into overload. |
A stalwart of loyalist denial as ever Pepik.
Pity you picked the wrong side of history though.
Because it's obvious to anyone with eyes to see and Danny Jowenko that WTC7 was a conventional common or garden controlled demolition on a grand scale.
Neither NIST And Their Incredible Non-Stop Cogitations, nor Mark Roberts And His Amazing Selected Evidence changes that. |
Oh well, let's go round the familiar circuit one more time. Danny Jowenko was misled to an extent about the the video he was watching, and was very unwise to base his comments simply on watching a video. He was just as sure that the collapse of the WTC towers was not due to CD, so are you sure you want to quote him as an authority? The demolition experts who studied the collapse of WTC7 in depth, talking to the people who were there at the time, are Implosion World magazine, who say it was not CD. If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others. |
My but you are behind the times.
The old standby JREFer meme - or 'lie' as I like to properly call a spade a spade - that Jowenko was 'misled' was discredited weeks if not months ago in a follow up phone interview wid da man.
A product of the more desperate days over at your magician's den, perhaps.
You can listen to it here:
http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/danny_jowenko_022207.mp3
though of course you won't.
And Implosion World? That's the one with even less credibility than Popular Mechanics (A Division of Homeland Security Inc), aint it?
Eyes to see, BW. Eyes to see.
And if you haven't got it by now, you probably never will. |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Well, that's a man with a Dutch accent, but is he Danny Jowenko? Surely his nose is the wrong shape? |
We're getting into bin Laden video territory here, so I'll assume this is drollery of some sort.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | OK, let us assume the call is genuine, it shows Mr Jowenko is a stubborn man, and will not easily change his mind, he could not be persuaded that the collapse of the towers was CD, and he would not retract his view of WTC 7. Strangely, the man who rang him did not bother to mention the towers, and neither do you. I wonder why not. As I said, Jowenko was not very wise to give his comments off to the cuff on the basis of watching a video, in either case. |
You rather selectively left out the part about 'studying the drawings' which suggests rather more consideration than 'off the cuff on the basis of a video.
Never mind, I expect no less.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Why has Implosion World no credibility, is it just because it will not fall for your particular fantasy? Or is it because the girl who sells the advertising once went out with the second cousin of the ex-wife of a man who services the boilers at Langley? I am sure you have found some straw to grasp to preserve your comic book view of the world. |
Ever wonder about how Implosion World stays afloat? Those handful of CD companies round the world must have a scores of subsciptions for each employee doncha think? Maybe all the staff send each other a few hundred subscriptions for Christmas.
Other than that, Editor Brett Blanchard (international man of mystery?) was pretty much taken apart here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/blanchard/index.html
| Bushwacker wrote: | | No comment on "If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others."? Surely there must be an approved conspiracist answer to this, which is an improvement on immediately trying to switch the discussion to the firemen in the towers, the best that has been done up until now? If not, I shall be very disappointed. |
Except we saw warnings being given that the building was about to blow up. We know they cleared a 600ft collapse zone. There is no doubt some collapse was expected - nothing suspicious about that.
It's the straight down, vertical symmetrical drop, roof to ground in six and a bit seconds and all within 70ft of the building perimeter bit that none of your ineffectual explanations and justifications can ever expain.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
"As in - he who hits the ground last, is demolished last?"
no as in the charges at the top of the building are detonated last.
"You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building."
care to point out the tallest building ever demolished? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="johndoe"]"As in - he who hits the ground last, is demolished last?"
| johndoe wrote: | | "no as in the charges at the top of the building are detonated last.? |
You'd need to clarify which charges in which building you mean here.
"You say that for all the world as if you would have a clue how to CD a 570ft building."
| johndoe wrote: | | "care to point out the tallest building ever demolished? |
Without being specific, from memory something about half the height of WTC7 "officially".
Unofficially, the world record would have to be WTC1.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Without being specific, from memory something about half the height of WTC7 "officially"."
so let me get this right...... the cia not only managed to perform all of this with noone noticing but with massive collabaration, but they also performed a demolition on a scale never even attempted before?
and it all went perfectly, everyone involved has kept their mouth shut, noone in the offices filled with explosives noticed and withstood having a plane fly into them.
aye right.
"You'd need to clarify which charges in which building you mean here."
in any explosive demolition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | "Without being specific, from memory something about half the height of WTC7 "officially"."
so let me get this right...... the cia not only managed to perform all of this with noone noticing but with massive collabaration, but they also performed a demolition on a scale never even attempted before?
and it all went perfectly, everyone involved has kept their mouth shut, noone in the offices filled with explosives noticed and withstood having a plane fly into them.
aye right.. |
I regret that your personal idea of what happened combined with a light sprinkling of ironic disbelief cuts no ice with me. Rather, it merely illuminates the limitations of your own imagination and experience.
Straight down, in six and a bit seconds is a CD, not an accident.
"You'd need to clarify which charges in which building you mean here."
| johndoe wrote: | | "in any explosive demolition. |
Again, for all the world like you would know how it was done.
We don't have to know the how - the results are unmistakable.
Even to a non-american CD professional (not that it took his input to alert anybody).
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Again, for all the world like you would know how it was done. "
MOT
(that's middle, outside, top)
i have a friend who is in the businees, he was part of the team that did the demolition in glasgow a few weeks ago (the ones from the sony advert)
"We don't have to know the how"
like everything else now it is easy enough to obtain if you want.
"the results are unmistakable."
odd that you somehow think yourself as an expert in this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps you should be contacting NIST with your 'insider' knowledge
that after all anyone can find out - just to 'prove' that it couldn't possibly be a CD.
After all - wasn't it MIT prof Tom Eager who hypothesised that buildings can only fall straight down? And we all know how everyone believed that classic academian chestnut.
Now if you've not got anything new to bring to the table other than your standard loyalist denials, I'll consider this exchange concluded.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"who hypothesised that buildings can only fall straight down?"
that's really how gravity works. not much horizontal motion going on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | "who hypothesised that buildings can only fall straight down?"
that's really how gravity works. not much horizontal motion going on. |
Quite.
Unfortunately though, that's not how demolishing buildings works.
Now excuse me, I feel a yawn coming on.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| demolishing buildings doesn't use gravity? what other mystical force is at play? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | | demolishing buildings doesn't use gravity? what other mystical force is at play? |
*sigh*
In the case of a structure collapsing chaotically (as opposed to in a controlled fashion) some deflection caused by the remaining standing parts provides an other than downward force.
CD is designed to eliminate that possibility in order for the building to collapse straight down and inwards. That's what CD does by design because it ain't gonna happen spontaneously - hence the specialists needed to ensure it happens as neatly as possible.
But you know this already.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"because it ain't gonna happen spontaneously"
why?
also wtc 7 didn't collapse inward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | "because it ain't gonna happen spontaneously"
why?
also wtc 7 didn't collapse inward. |
Why?
Well because material doesn't just remove itself out of the path of collapse.
And as to your second point, if you study the various collapse videos of WTC7 you will see it does indeed fold itself neatly into a tidy pile.
With 570 ft of steel construction contained within the original perimeter plus 70ft, that is also self evident.
Except to loyalist game players like yourself, of course.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | that's really how gravity works. not much horizontal motion going on |
so how did WTC7 sustain "massive damage" when it is 300 feet away from the nearest falling tower, with buildings between. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| you see chek you have a problem,. in controlled demos the building "waists" wtc 7 didn't. it collapsed down but did not "implode". it was for all intents and purposes a straight drop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | | you see chek you have a problem,. in controlled demos the building "waists" wtc 7 didn't. it collapsed down but did not "implode". it was for all intents and purposes a straight drop. |
You're just unobservant johndoe.
Normally I'd post a vid - like the one shot from the northern side, or a photo showing large intact portions of the sides lying neatly on top of the pile having fallen inwards, to illustrate my point - but frankly I can't be arsed with this cr*p any longer, and furthermore what would be the point?
Since your first post, it's evident you're here to be an OCT loyalist and no more.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
