| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | Bushwacker wrote: | | the lift shafts were collapsing along with everything else. As they were only made of plasterboard, they would put up virtually no resistance. The pressure wave would enter at the top. |
The lift shafts were made of plasterboard ?
Have you got that right ?
I'm beginning to see what you're saying now.
When you say "the pressure wave would enter at the top" do you mean at the top of the lift shaft ?
Was the top of the lift shaft on the floor that started to collapse ?
The entire floor of a building starts to collapse, including the lift shaft on that floor, but not the exterior walls, is that correct ? |
Check the construction of the lift shafts for yourself.
Yes, when I am talking about the lift shafts and I say "the pressure wave would enter at the top" I mean the top of the lift shaft.
The top of the lift shaft would be at whatever level the collapse wave had reached at the time.
As NIST concluded that the ties between the floor trusses and the support columns were robust enough to enable the sagging collapse floor to pull in the columns, I suppose the most likely thing during the global collapse phase is that the collapsing floors pulled in the exterior walls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well lets just accept that the lift shafts actually were made out of plasterboard for the purposes of this discussion.
The collapse has only just begun with the first ceiling falling across the entire floor area of the tower.
You are suggesting that this entire floor, as it begins to fall would cause a "pressure wave" that travelled down the lift shaft.
The difficulty I'm having here is that even the entire floor could fall in this way and could start a "pressure wave" that would travel down the lift shaft, how did the pressure wave get into the lift shaft ?
I mean, I thought that lift shafts, even those made of plasterboard, were hollow shafts.
As such they only have a ceiling at the very top of the shaft, where it ends.
So, if the "pressure wave" began on a floor that was not at the very top of the lift shaft, what would cause this "pressure wave" in the lift shaft ?
The lift shaft might not have terminated at the point where the "pressure wave" began so what was it that built up air pressure in the lift shaft ?
If, as I think you might be suggesting that the ceiling of the entire floor around the lift shaft caused the "pressure wave" then how did the pressure wave get into the lift shaft ?
Also, I'm relieved that you mentioned the floor trusses and NIST's theory about the sagging causing the steels to pull inwards because this gives me another problem understanding the "pressure wave".
If, as NIST suggest, the walls were pulled inwards, then why didn't the "pressure wave" vent through the fracturing walls ?
Sorry if I'm being a bit slow here.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If I understand you correctly, you are asking why the falling floors, which form a hollow square, should create a pressure wave going down shafts which are underneath the hollow centre of the square. There are two answers to that, firstly we are dealing here with air which flows freely in all directions; the pressure would quickly tend to equality across the entire area of the floors. As an analogy, although a domestic fan may have a big hub holding the blades, a very short distance away from the fan the draught of air will not have a hole in it corresponding to the hub. The air escaping from under the falling floors will go in all directions, both outside the building and down the lift shafts. Secondly, it is likely that after the collapse wave has started going what is dropping is a mass of debris across the whole width of the building, filling the hole in the hollow square.
The lift shafts would not be sealed off from the pressure wave, all walls were collapsing. You ask why the pressure wave did not vent through the fracturing external walls, but I am sure that it did, it would go in all directions, including through the exterior walls and down the lift shafts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
its a waste of time, although i don't think every little thing bushwacker says is untrue it is obvious sometimes that certain things are either made up or just pure speculation.
the only evidence for the collpase is all external apart from whats left of the steel beams and they can only really tell the story of heat, you could say damage to but then who knows if that damage occured from plane crash or during the buildings collapse.
so knowing where air pressure went or how it reacted or which bit broke of first inside the towers is just pure speculation no matter who trys to explain it including NIST.
sure there is a certain amount of logic you can put into it to guess what things are but then its only guessing, so regardless of where this discussion leads it dos'nt prove anything for anyone because anyone can speculate on what happened inside without having any visual or pyshical evidence to support it.
and if there is visual evidence for example squibs then anyone can make up the reasons for them without knowing if there reasons are true, because its impossible to know for sure which ever side of the debate your coming from.
its just a discussion on belief with what ever logic you have rather than factual evidence.
all you can go by is what we can see on the outside but even then you'll find it works like this.
explosions squibs flashes etc = possible demolition, is illogical 
explosions squibs flashes etc = mistaken witnesses lieing firemen air pressure and sun glare or what ever other excuss critics can think of without knowing for sure, is logical
a new investigastion = illogical as long as unconfirmed guesses(like air pressure) can explain away the facts.
no investigastion into the exlosions that people/firemen heard and felt = logical
if all the firemen came forward and said what had happened it would still be illocal if it all contridicted the offical version, if it agreed with the offical version then its logical.
it has nothing to do with truth and facts(which im certain both sides get right and wrong) if it dos'nt agree with the offical version it will be illogical especially as far as critics are concerned.
so i car'nt really see the point in this debate, bushwacker will make it up sometimes with out even knowing, if he considers it logic then it must be true regardless of if he knows it or not, but the purpose is to just debunk what you say regardless of the truth or how far fetched some of the explainations are if its possible its logical as long as it don't contridict the offical version.
and i know bushwacker dos'nt know for sure if and what happened inside the tower, nobody can be, even nist can only really give the best logical guesses on a huge part of it, but even that is by looking at mainly external visuals and getting it to fit the outside visuals apart from some of the steel from the fire zone.
the fact they did'nt look into explosions when many were report was just logical
including all facts and information in a investigation is illogical if it contridicts the offical version. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
explosion squibs and flashes at the same place same time same event.
i could understand it being illogical to think controlled demoltion had taken place had only one or the other been seen or accounted for, but all 3 trademarks as well as a building turning mostly to dust and collapsing at a rate a little over freefall speed?
you'd have to be insane not to include it as a suspect if it was truth and honesty people were intrested in, however i think a large numer of people know this aint about truth and honesty where the mainstream and investigastions are concerned. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK I really think that I'm beginning to see what you're saying now.
Assuming then that the air on a floor of a building was being pressurised across the entire floor area by a falling mass of the floor above that was in one piece as it started to pancake down thereby preventing the air below from escaping vertically and assuming also that even as NIST declare the floor beams sagged due to the intense heat of the 56 minute old jet fuel fire and that these beams pulled the vertical structural steel inwards thereby pulling in the external walls creating a path of least resistance escape route for the "pressure wave" which you now admit would vent into the open air through the crumbling external walls and assuming that the "pressure wave" somehow made it into the plasterboard lift shaft and started to travel down the lift shaft.
How did the pressure wave get out of the lift shaft many floors below ?
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | OK I really think that I'm beginning to see what you're saying now.
Assuming then that the air on a floor of a building was being pressurised across the entire floor area by a falling mass of the floor above that was in one piece as it started to pancake down thereby preventing the air below from escaping vertically and assuming also that even as NIST declare the floor beams sagged due to the intense heat of the 56 minute old jet fuel fire and that these beams pulled the vertical structural steel inwards thereby pulling in the external walls creating a path of least resistance escape route for the "pressure wave" which you now admit would vent into the open air through the crumbling external walls and assuming that the "pressure wave" somehow made it into the plasterboard lift shaft and started to travel down the lift shaft.
How did the pressure wave get out of the lift shaft many floors below ? |
Perhaps through doors left open as the power failed, doors blown open by the fireball, holes made in the lift shafts by falling lifts crashing down. Let us also not forget the stairwells as a channel for the pressure wave, where doors may have become jammed open.
I never claimed that all the pressure wave came down the lift shafts and stairwells, probably that was only a small fraction. The idea of hermetically sealed walls was yours entirely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Perhaps through doors left open as the power failed |
The doors to lift shafts are shut aren't they ?
My experience of lifts is that the doors to the lift itself and the doors on each floor only open when a lift arrives.
Why would a lift door to the floor itself be open as a result of a power cut.
If lift shaft doors opened during power cuts then we'd have lots of examples of people falling down open lift shafts during power cuts wouldn't we ?
Not a good design idea is it, default position in a power down situation means landing doors opening to lift shafts.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | doors blown open by the fireball, |
This is the same fireball that travelled down the lift shafts, blew out the lobby, melted the lifts and welded a chap to his seat ?
On it's way it blows out lift shaft doors offering lots of resistance compared to the la dolce vita of an empty lift shaft ?
Why would it do that ?
Does our fireball prefer the path of least resistance or not ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | holes made in the lift shafts by falling lifts crashing down. |
Hang on a minute.
Has the falling mass reached that far down yet ?
I thought you were trying to say that what some call explosive squibs were in fact the pressure wave venting many floors below the collapse wave.
Now you appear to be saying that the falling debris caused the holes in the lift shaft through which the collapse wave vented.
So what got there first, the debris or the "pressure wave" caused by the falling debris ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Let us also not forget the stairwells as a channel for the pressure wave, where doors may have become jammed open. |
So for the stair wells to have been the path of least resistance for the "pressure wave" how many doors would need to have been "jammed open" for the "pressure wave" to have escaped so many floors below the collapse wave ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | I never claimed that all the pressure wave came down the lift shafts and stairwells, probably that was only a small fraction. |
So where did the majority of the pressure wave dissipate to then ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | The idea of hermetically sealed walls was yours entirely. |
I proposed such a ridiculous thing only to be able to accept your notion that at the initiation of collapse a "pressure wave" must have started to build.
For that to happen, I reasoned that an entire floor collapses as a single plunger like slab with no gaps at it's sides or in it's middle that would have allowed the air below to escape vertically upwards through it.
Of course no such thing exists in reality.
But without that you can't have your "pressure wave" can you ?
Now that you have conceded that the majority of air below the falling mass would have been vented elsewhere leaving probably only a small fraction to dissipate elsewhere, your "pressure wave" explanation for what some consider to detonation squibs, stands on it's own for the complete fiction that it evidently appears to be.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do admire the way you so determinedly misunderstand everything possible, quite a skill you have there!
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Perhaps through doors left open as the power failed |
| Mark Gobell wrote: |
The doors to lift shafts are shut aren't they ?
My experience of lifts is that the doors to the lift itself and the doors on each floor only open when a lift arrives.
Why would a lift door to the floor itself be open as a result of a power cut.
If lift shaft doors opened during power cuts then we'd have lots of examples of people falling down open lift shafts during power cuts wouldn't we ?
Not a good design idea is it, default position in a power down situation means landing doors opening to lift shafts. |
No, dear boy, lift doors that happened to be open at the time the power failed, and therefore remained open
| Bushwacker wrote: | | doors blown open by the fireball, |
| Mark Gobell wrote: | This is the same fireball that travelled down the lift shafts, blew out the lobby, melted the lifts and welded a chap to his seat ?
On it's way it blows out lift shaft doors offering lots of resistance compared to the la dolce vita of an empty lift shaft ?
Why would it do that ?
Does our fireball prefer the path of least resistance or not ? |
Why should the lift shaft be empty, lift shafts being made to contain lifts? Suppose the lift is there in the shaft, creating a substantial obstruction, the fireball might blow out the doors above it.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | holes made in the lift shafts by falling lifts crashing down. |
| Mark Gobell wrote: | Hang on a minute.
Has the falling mass reached that far down yet ?
I thought you were trying to say that what some call explosive squibs were in fact the pressure wave venting many floors below the collapse wave.
Now you appear to be saying that the falling debris caused the holes in the lift shaft through which the collapse wave vented.
So what got there first, the debris or the "pressure wave" caused by the falling debris ? |
Who is talking about the falling mass? I said falling lifts. Lifts are suspended by cables from drums on mechanical floors far above them. If those upper floors have been destroyed the lift will fall. At the WTC towers there were sky lobbies where you had to change from an express lift to a local lift, therefore some lifts would fall not to the basement but to the sky lobby below. Crashing down into that, it might well break through the lift shaft.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Let us also not forget the stairwells as a channel for the pressure wave, where doors may have become jammed open. |
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | So for the stair wells to have been the path of least resistance for the "pressure wave" how many doors would need to have been "jammed open" for the "pressure wave" to have escaped so many floors below the collapse wave ? |
I was talking about doors off the stairwells, as I said earlier.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | I never claimed that all the pressure wave came down the lift shafts and stairwells, probably that was only a small fraction. |
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | So where did the majority of the pressure wave dissipate to then ? |
Probably externally through the sides.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | The idea of hermetically sealed walls was yours entirely. |
| Mark Gobell wrote: | I proposed such a ridiculous thing only to be able to accept your notion that at the initiation of collapse a "pressure wave" must have started to build.
For that to happen, I reasoned that an entire floor collapses as a single plunger like slab with no gaps at it's sides or in it's middle that would have allowed the air below to escape vertically upwards through it.
Of course no such thing exists in reality.
But without that you can't have your "pressure wave" can you ?
Now that you have conceded that the majority of air below the falling mass would have been vented elsewhere leaving probably only a small fraction to dissipate elsewhere, your "pressure wave" explanation for what some consider to detonation squibs, stands on it's own for the complete fiction that it evidently appears to be. |
So helicopters cannot fly in your bizarre world, since the air pressure generated by the rotor would simply dissipate to the sides? You have no idea of the physics involved which leaves you very ill-equipped for you only concern, trying to rubbish the most likely explanation for the "squibs" in favour of an explanation that simply does not begin to make sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | No, dear boy, lift doors that happened to be open at the time the power failed, and therefore remained open |
Which means they would have a lift there wouldn't they, rather than an open door to a lift shaft ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Why should the lift shaft be empty, lift shafts being made to contain lifts? Suppose the lift is there in the shaft, creating a substantial obstruction, the fireball might blow out the doors above it. |
So was there no air gap around the lift in the shaft ?
Are we talking hermetically sealed lifts in lift shafts now, so tightly sealed that any "minority pressure wave" could not continue on it's descent around the lift itself ?
If as you suggest the lift shaft was in the way of the "minority pressure wave", how did the fireball get to the ground floor lobby then ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Who is talking about the falling mass? I said falling lifts. Lifts are suspended by cables from drums on mechanical floors far above them. If those upper floors have been destroyed the lift will fall. |
But you just suggested:
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Suppose the lift is there in the shaft, creating a substantial obstruction, the fireball might blow out the doors above it. |
Now the lift has fallen.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | At the WTC towers there were sky lobbies where you had to change from an express lift to a local lift, therefore some lifts would fall not to the basement but to the sky lobby below. Crashing down into that, it might well break through the lift shaft. |
Why would a lift "break through a lift shaft" ?
Did the fireball and it's pursuing lover get out at the sky lobbies too ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | I was talking about doors off the stairwells, as I said earlier. |
Nope don't understand that at all. Please explain.
| Bushwacker wrote: | I never claimed that all the pressure wave came down the lift shafts and stairwells, probably that was only a small fraction.
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | So where did the majority of the pressure wave dissipate to then ? |
Probably externally through the sides. |
Yet the remaining "minority pressure wave" was still of sufficient force to travel down lift shafts or, as yet, unexplained stair wells, get out at the sky lobbies and blow out windows several floors below ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | So helicopters cannot fly in your bizarre world, since the air pressure generated by the rotor would simply dissipate to the sides? |
I'm quite sure that helicopters are designed to create sufficient lift for them to hover in the open air.
How does this relate to your "minority pressure wave" ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | You have no idea of the physics involved |
Well that is true I have little idea about the physics apart from some very basic principles like air pressure finding the easiest way out of a confined space, structural steel, concrete and buildings in general not crumbling after burning for 56 minutes.
I'm assuming by that you do have some knowledge about the physics involved so would appreciate you enlightening me please.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | which leaves you very ill-equipped for you only concern, trying to rubbish the most likely explanation for the "squibs" in favour of an explanation that simply does not begin to make sense. |
My only concern Bushy is to try and understand your alternative hypothesis about what might have been the reasons for those huge and numerous expulsions of dust through the sides of the twin towers just before and during their collapses.
I seem to recall that the paradigm of Occams Razor was flung about quite liberally in an attempt to criticise those that offered alternative explanations to the official narrative.
Yet you seem to have now abandoned that argument in favour of some fantastic ideas about this "minority pressure wave" making it's merry way down through the infrastructure of a sky scraper.
I would contend that your argument is designed to deny the visual, eye witness and audio evidence for explosions and squibs that caused the demolition of the twin towers.
If your argument is that easy to understand and to explain, surely NIST would have laid it all out for us by now ?
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another raft of deliberate misunderstandings; you really are extremely tedious.
Lifts are not hermetically sealed in lift shafts.
There were a lot of lift shafts, local lifts to sky lobbies and express lifts to the basement.
At the time of the fireball from the impact, the upper floors were still there, therefore the lifts had not fallen.
Can you not imagine that a crashing lift would create rather a lot of damage?
Stair wells have doors off them to give access to the office floors.
Helicopters create lift by downwards pressure in the open air, the fact that the exterior walls might have fallen does not mean there could not be a high pressure wave travelling down the lift shafts and stair wells.
The principle of Occam's Razor means that when a damaged and burning building falls, one is more likely to find the cause by looking at the effect of the damage and fire, rather than fantastic notions of physically impossible demolition charges, beams from satellites or numerological mumbo-jumbo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marky, neither I not any other critic to my knowledge has ever suggested the firemen are lying, please do not say that we have.
The only people who have ever insulted the firemen are those troofers who believe they were in league with Larry Silverstein to demolish WTC7
The FDNY lost over 350 men on that tragic day, if firemen thought that 9/11 was an inside job, they would be moving heaven and earth to expose it, instead they have no time for conspiracy theories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Another raft of deliberate misunderstandings; you really are extremely tedious. |
Sorry don't mean to be. I'm just trying to understand what you are suggesting and pointing out the obvious flaws in what you do say. It's called debate Bushy.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Lifts are not hermetically sealed in lift shafts. |
I know. It was rhetorical really and in response to this, from you.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Suppose the lift is there in the shaft, creating a substantial obstruction, the fireball might blow out the doors above it. |
So, I ask again, as we all now know that the lifts in the shafts are surrounded by air, why would a fireball blow out the door above the lift that you suggest creates a substantial obstruction ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | There were a lot of lift shafts, local lifts to sky lobbies and express lifts to the basement.
At the time of the fireball from the impact, the upper floors were still there, therefore the lifts had not fallen.
Can you not imagine that a crashing lift would create rather a lot of damage? |
So when the upper floors started to fall, the lifts fell, smashing holes into the lift shaft that then allowed the "minority pressure wave" to vent.
Have I got that right ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Stair wells have doors off them to give access to the office floors. |
Thanks for the clarification.
Can I ask my question again now please:
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | So for the stair wells to have been the path of least resistance for the "pressure wave" how many doors would need to have been "jammed open" for the "pressure wave" to have escaped so many floors below the collapse wave ? |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Helicopters create lift by downwards pressure in the open air, |
Thereby creating lift.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | the fact that the exterior walls might have fallen does not mean there could not be a high pressure wave travelling down the lift shafts and stair wells. |
So now your "minority of displaced air" has assumed high pressure, even with crumbling exterior walls ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | The principle of Occam's Razor means that when a damaged and burning building falls, one is more likely to find the cause by looking at the effect of the damage and fire, rather than fantastic notions of physically impossible demolition charges, beams from satellites or numerological mumbo-jumbo. |
Perhaps you could explain why you think that demolition charges are "physically impossible".
Equally.
The principle of Occam's Razor means that when considers the demolitions of buildings and when one sees numerous demolition squibs venting through the sides of tall skyscrapers and when one corroborates that visual evidence with the eye witness evidence of explosions going off in the buildings, one is more likely to find that the cause of said demolitions are explosives, and that the cause of the huge and numerous venting was in fact more likely to demolition squibs, rather than fantastic notions of physically impossible "pressure waves" and other such ludicrous mumbo jumbo.
Neither statements represent the principle of Occam's Razor at all actually.
But as you've perverted it for your own ends, then I guess it's fair game to do likewise.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The principle of Occam's Razor is that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.
Here we have buildings that are damaged and on fire and then collapse. The collapse is fully expainable by the damage and fire, we do not need to assume another cause.
Your formulation makes a number of unnecessary assumptions, but then you know that.
Since you are now asking, with apparent surprise, whether a pressure wave implies higher pressure, I do not think there is any point in humouring you further. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | The principle of Occam's Razor is that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. |
That's more like it, which is why I said you seem to have abandoned it, preferring instead a complex series of scenarios that render your idea about a "pressure wave" venting many floors below the impact zone as being rather fanciful at best and disingenuous at worst.
Your formulation is built entirely on assumptions is it not ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Here we have buildings that are damaged and on fire and then collapse. The collapse is fully expainable by the damage and fire, we do not need to assume another cause. |
We can do this on another thread if you like.
Here we're trying to stay on topic about squibs or no squibs.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Your formulation makes a number of unnecessary assumptions, but then you know that. |
Not sure that I've given you any "formulation" yet have I.
You have offered what I consider to be a very tenuous and inconsistent "formulation" attempting to offer an explanation of how a "pressure wave" could weave it's wicked way through the infrastructure of a building and vent into the open air.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Since you are now asking, with apparent surprise, whether a pressure wave implies higher pressure, I do not think there is any point in humouring you further. |
Well, it's just that you hadn't mentioned a "high pressure wave" until very recently in the thread.
You also introduced that new term after you had conceded that the majority of the air beneath the falling mass would have vented into the open air.
So, the point still stands about how a minority of the remaining air that did not vent through the crumbling walls could also assume "high pressure" ?
Would you be interested in seeing a picture of the twin towers that includes what I think is a squib, way below the collapse zone ?
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The principle of Occam's Razor means that when considers the demolitions of buildings and when one sees numerous demolition squibs venting through the sides of tall skyscrapers |
Who sees demolition squibs? 10 out of 10 conspiracy theorists agree? You and Alex Jones? A majority of Illuminati and UFO spotters? Because the one thing we can be sure you aren't talking about is a survey of engineers or demolitions experts - its been several years and you still haven't made any effort to ask people with relevant expertise, insteading taking comfort in the opinions of youtube watching amateurs. Why is that? | Quote: | | and when one corroborates that visual evidence with the eye witness evidence of explosions going off in the buildings |
But how many of these people think there were bombs and how many are you just manipulating to your own ends? Explosions is not the same thing as bomb. You know this, but you also know how important it is to pretend they are the same thing. | Quote: | | rather than fantastic notions of physically impossible "pressure waves" and other such ludicrous mumbo jumbo. |
It is a fantastic notion? Is it physically impossible? Is it ludicrous mumbo jumbo? What qualifications do you have to say any of these things? Ever made a trip down to the local engineering school to ask whether they think it is "physically impossible" or "ludicrous"? Of course not, I'll bet if I asked you in 20 years you still wouldn't have bothered. That's not what troof is about.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thought I could hear the distant bugles of the cavalry . . .
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Who sees demolition squibs? 10 out of 10 conspiracy theorists agree? You and Alex Jones? A majority of Illuminati and UFO spotters? |
I see massive ejections of dust filled air at high pressure, many, many floors below the point at which the building starts to disintegrate.
I've tried to follow the argument offered by Bushy and although I concede that Bushy does not represent cutting edge thinking or even the demolition deniers best effort, I for one do not accept that these ejections were caused by a "pressure wave".
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Because the one thing we can be sure you aren't talking about is a survey of engineers or demolitions experts - its been several years and you still haven't made any effort to ask people with relevant expertise, insteading taking comfort in the opinions of youtube watching amateurs. Why is that? |
Personally I have contacted zero demolition experts. We all know about Mr Jowenko's volte-face. Maybe he had dust in his eyes during his WTC7 premier ?
I have taken nobody's opinion on this. I have made my own opinion that is based on looking at other demolitions and reading about how demolitions are done.
I have read and listened to eye witness testimony. I then compare what my own eyes and ears see and read about 9/11 with that which I now understand about controlled demolitions. I listen to people like your alter ego, I have read your Popular Mechanics bible, I have read what NIST's Shyam Sunder has said on the matter.
I have then made up my own mind. Is that OK with you ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | But how many of these people think there were bombs |
I have no idea. I haven't done a count. Have you ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | and how many are you just manipulating to your own ends? |
I'm quite sure that I have manipulated nothing that anyone has said.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Explosions is not the same thing as bomb. You know this, but you also know how important it is to pretend they are the same thing. |
I have not pretended anything.
When we have a body of evidence that all attests to explosive events, one has to look for the source.
Do you have an alternative source of the body of evidence that attests to explosions that I may have missed ?
| I wrote: | | rather than fantastic notions of physically impossible "pressure waves" and other such ludicrous mumbo jumbo. |
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | It is a fantastic notion? |
Until I hear a better explanation, for me it remains highly unlikely and therefore place it last in the queue of possibilities.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Is it physically impossible? |
I'm not qualified to judge whether or not the phenomena that Bushy has attempted to describe is physically impossible or not.
I have listened to Bushy's, imo not very good argument and I discount it as being highly unlikely.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Is it ludicrous mumbo jumbo? |
Until I hear a better explanation, yes.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | What qualifications do you have to say any of these things? |
None whatsoever.
What qualification do you have to suggest these things ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Ever made a trip down to the local engineering school to ask whether they think it is "physically impossible" or "ludicrous"? |
Nope. Do you think it likely that they would know ? Any tips on possible sources would be much appreciated.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Of course not, I'll bet if I asked you in 20 years you still wouldn't have bothered. |
Who knows what the future holds. I'll take your money if you like ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | That's not what troof is about. |
And Popular Mechanics and NIST is what troof is about is it ?
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Thought I could hear the distant bugles of the cavalry . . . |
Hearing sounds that aren't there and believing in wild conspiracies can actually be syptoms of the same problem, try talking to your doctor. | Quote: | | I see massive ejections of dust filled air at high pressure, many, many floors below the point at which the building starts to disintegrate. |
Yes, and who exactly gives a nonsense? That's another question for your doctor. "I'm trying to solve engineering problems but I'm not an engineer and I refuse to speak to engineers. What do you think, doc?" | Quote: | | I've tried to follow the argument offered by Bushy and although I concede that Bushy does not represent cutting edge thinking or even the demolition deniers best effort, I for one do not accept that these ejections were caused by a "pressure wave". |
I see. Fascinating. | Quote: | | Personally I have contacted zero demolition experts. |
No surprise. | Quote: | | I have taken nobody's opinion on this. I have made my own opinion that is based on looking at other demolitions and reading about how demolitions are done. |
Right, so through your examination of othe 100 story steel frame structures which collapsed from the top down via demolition, none of which exist. | Quote: | | I have read and listened to eye witness testimony. I then compare what my own eyes and ears see and read about 9/11 with that which I now understand about controlled demolitions. I listen to people like your alter ego, I have read your Popular Mechanics bible, I have read what NIST's Shyam Sunder has said on the matter. |
Any reason you don't go to technical experts to find answers to technical questions? Because lets face it, when it comes down to "fantastic notions", "physically impossible pressure waves" and slagging things off as "ludicrous mumbo jumbo", you're basically a graduate of youtube university pontificating on engineering questions. | Quote: | | I have no idea. I haven't done a count. |
Right, so as long as you can selectively quote them in a way that supports you, what they think itsn't of any importance to you. | Quote: | | Nope. Do you think it likely that they would know ? |
Would engineers be able to answer engineering questions? I expect they would be able to, yes, they would certainly be able to provide more insight into the matter than you or I. | Quote: | | Any tips on possible sources would be much appreciated. |
You need a tip on finding a university? Oh dear.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | I wrote: | | Thought I could hear the distant bugles of the cavalry . . . |
Hearing sounds that aren't there and believing in wild conspiracies can actually be symptoms of the same problem, try talking to your doctor. |
But I did hear them. Honest.
I try and stay clear of doctors but thanks for the advice.
Not seeing things with your own eyes and in believing in wild conjecture from Popular Mechanics and certain "experts" from NIST can actually be symptoms of the same problem, perhaps you might consider talking to your doctor.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | I wrote: | | I see massive ejections of dust filled air at high pressure, many, many floors below the point at which the building starts to disintegrate. |
Yes, and who exactly gives a nonsense? |
I do.
And, evidently from your adversarial attention, you clearly, also "give a nonsense" as does your alter ego.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | That's another question for your doctor. "I'm trying to solve engineering problems but I'm not an engineer and I refuse to speak to engineers. What do you think, doc?" |
Why would you advise me to pose that question to my doctor ?
He's not an engineer is he ?
In your opinion would he be qualified to respond sufficiently well for you to consider his response ?
After all, my doctor is a medical doctor with no engineering qualifications ?
Do you ask your doctor about engineering problems ?
To suggest that I refuse to speak to engineers is inaccurate. I am an engineer, I speak with engineers daily.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | I wrote: | | I've tried to follow the argument offered by Bushy and although I concede that Bushy does not represent cutting edge thinking or even the demolition deniers best effort, I for one do not accept that these ejections were caused by a "pressure wave". |
I see. Fascinating. |
Glad you found that bit interesting.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | I wrote: | | Personally I have contacted zero demolition experts. |
No surprise. |
I knew you wouldn't be surprised. That's why I didn't feel the need to let you down gently.
Do you think that I should contact them personally do you think ?
What has been your experience of contacting demolition experts ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | I wrote: | | I have taken nobody's opinion on this. I have made my own opinion that is based on looking at other demolitions and reading about how demolitions are done. |
Right, so through your examination of othe 100 story steel frame structures which collapsed from the top down via demolition, none of which exist. |
Sorry I don't understand what it is you have tried to write there.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | I wrote: | | I have read and listened to eye witness testimony. I then compare what my own eyes and ears see and read about 9/11 with that which I now understand about controlled demolitions. I listen to people like your alter ego, I have read your Popular Mechanics bible, I have read what NIST's Shyam Sunder has said on the matter. |
Any reason you don't go to technical experts to find answers to technical questions? |
Well , I will try my doctor, if you think he could help with demolition questions.
The reason is that I don't know of any demolition experts personally. Do you ? Have you contacted them ? What did they say ? Could you give me their contact details ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Because lets face it, when it comes down to "fantastic notions", "physically impossible pressure waves" and slagging things off as "ludicrous mumbo jumbo", you're basically a graduate of youtube university pontificating on engineering questions. |
I don't recall mentioning YouTube. You have mentioned it twice now though. Are you into YouTube ?
I seem to recall my conversation was with your alter ego, and that was what my above response regarding "physically impossible pressure waves" and the retort of "mumbo jumbo" was about.
Your alter ego did not, as far as I can recall quote any professional source in support of his notion that this "pressure wave" could do what was being hypothesised.
Hence my response.
| I wrote: | | I have no idea. I haven't done a count. |
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Right, so as long as you can selectively quote them in a way that supports you, what they think itsn't of any importance to you. |
I'm not aware that I quoted any of the numerous eye witnesses that claimed to hear explosions.
So quite how you can accuse me of misquoting people when I haven't even quoted anyone is baffling.
Please explain.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | Ever made a trip down to the local engineering school to ask whether they think it is "physically impossible" or "ludicrous"?
| I wrote: | | Nope. Do you think it likely that they would know ? |
Would engineers be able to answer engineering questions? I expect they would be able to, yes, they would certainly be able to provide more insight into the matter than you or I. |
Would engineers at my local engineering school know about "pressure waves" in disintegrating buildings ?
I don't have a local engineering school any more, they closed it down.
I agree that experts in this field would be able to provide better answers than you and I and your alter ego, whose hypothesis I was trying to follow. Maybe you could do a better job of laying it out for me ?
Have you ever made a trip down to the local engineering school to ask whether they think it is "physically impossible" or "ludicrous"?
If so what did they tell you ?
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | | Quote: | | Any tips on possible sources would be much appreciated. |
You need a tip on finding a university? Oh dear. |
Well no I can do that all on my own I think, if I really really try.
I imagine that I would have some difficulty finding some sources that could explain the behaviour of a "pressure wave" in a disintegrating building though, which is why I asked you for your help.
Do you know of any sources ?
You left a couple of questions out from my previous response, not that I would accuse you of selective quoting. That would be unhelpful and quite possibly, inaccurate.
I'll just repeat them again for you in case you overlooked them.
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: | What qualifications do you have to say any of these things?
| I wrote: | None whatsoever.
What qualification do you have to suggest these things ? |
|
and
| Bushwackers alter ego wrote: |
That's not what troof is about.
| I wrote: | | And Popular Mechanics and NIST is what troof is about is it ? |
|
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: |
Well, it's just that you hadn't mentioned a "high pressure wave" until very recently in the thread.
You also introduced that new term after you had conceded that the majority of the air beneath the falling mass would have vented into the open air.
So, the point still stands about how a minority of the remaining air that did not vent through the crumbling walls could also assume "high pressure" ?
|
Sorry to confuse you yet again, it is difficult not to when you appear to have absolutely no concept of physics. Air driven out between floors will be at a higher pressure, whether it vents into the open air through the shattering exterior walls or is driven down the lift shafts and stairwells, forming a pressure wave. A pressure wave implies that air is at higher than atmospheric pressure. I hope that is clear enough for you.
From your strange earlier postings, I am unclear whether or not you accept that a fireball travelled down to the lobby at the time of the impacts, would you clarify that please. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Sorry to confuse you yet again, it is difficult not to when you appear to have absolutely no concept of physics. |
Ouch you've rumbled me.
Perhaps you could explain the physics for me ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Air driven out between floors will be at a higher pressure, whether it vents into the open air through the shattering exterior walls or is driven down the lift shafts and stairwells, forming a pressure wave. A pressure wave implies that air is at higher than atmospheric pressure. I hope that is clear enough for you. |
So this "pressure wave" can vent into the open air and travel down plasterboard lift shafts and stairwells simultaneously ?
As my grasp of physics is non-existant, perhaps you could explain the physics for me ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | From your strange earlier postings, I am unclear whether or not you accept that a fireball travelled down to the lobby at the time of the impacts, would you clarify that please. |
I have never been under the impression that a "fireball" travelled anywhere apart from the one we all saw exploding into the open air.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | Bushwacker wrote: | | Sorry to confuse you yet again, it is difficult not to when you appear to have absolutely no concept of physics. |
Ouch you've rumbled me.
Perhaps you could explain the physics for me ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Air driven out between floors will be at a higher pressure, whether it vents into the open air through the shattering exterior walls or is driven down the lift shafts and stairwells, forming a pressure wave. A pressure wave implies that air is at higher than atmospheric pressure. I hope that is clear enough for you. |
So this "pressure wave" can vent into the open air and travel down plasterboard lift shafts and stairwells simultaneously ?
As my grasp of physics is non-existant, perhaps you could explain the physics for me ?
| Bushwacker wrote: | | From your strange earlier postings, I am unclear whether or not you accept that a fireball travelled down to the lobby at the time of the impacts, would you clarify that please. |
I have never been under the impression that a "fireball" travelled anywhere apart from the one we all saw exploding into the open air. |
Yes, you have got it, the pressure wave can vent into the open air and travel down plasterboard lift shafts and stairwells simultaneously.
Here are some witness acoounts of the fireball travelling down the towers, are all of these people liars, would you say?
A survivor from a floor in the 80s:
“The entire corridor became an inferno outside our front door. Smoke began to enter our office. There was also debris falling. ... The fire on the corridor was at least 10 ft high, and it ran the … good length of the corridor. Then I saw a fireball come down the elevator shaft and blew the elevator doors. The fireball came right at me; it was a really bright color.”
A survivor from a floor in the 40s:
“I saw the elevator in front me had flames coming out from it. The elevator was closed but the flames came from the front where the doors meet and on the sides. They reached about a foot and a half, with the flames standing from the floor to the ceiling. I saw a chandelier shaking; it was really moving. The corridor was dim. I also heard people screaming from the [nearby] floor. I felt the
heat on my face and I thought that my eyebrows were going to get burned. Black smoke starting filling the corridor, it got really dense really fast.”
A survivor in the basement:
“I saw a big bright orange color coming through the basement with the smoke ... A fire ball came shooting out of the basement door.”
Livon Neil, North Tower 38th floor
After diving under his desk in response to what he thought was an earthquake, the 30-year-old systems analyst (who graduated with a bachelor of science in physiology and human biology in 1994 while attending New College) heard "screaming coming from the elevator shaft, like ladies screaming. And I saw dust coming out, smoke." He ran toward the stairs, only to hear more yelling from below. There seemed to be no way out for anybody. He huddled in the stairway for some 20 minutes, until a phalanx of firefighters – many of them soon to sacrifice their own lives – arrived and opened an exit for him and his group. "While I was coming out," Neil says softly, "it was like a war zone. I looked up and saw a person in mid-air. I looked to my right in the courtyard and there were body parts."
Christopher Ferrer:
...I thought it was odd that no one was coming into our stairwell from other floors. I assumed that they found other stairwells. … 21, 20, 19 … I could smell something familiar. There it is, my first connection to the outside. I could smell something. What is it? It reminds me of something. Kerosene? It smells like the kerosene heaters my father had 20 years ago in the Poconos. (I never made the connection to jet fuel until later on.)
…We leave the stairwell onto the concourse. The view was war-like. When we came out of the emergency door, you could see burned debris all over the plaza.
……..When we got to 1, the elevator doors were blown out and blackened. These were our first images of what was happening. They led us out the Marriott Hotel lobby. On the floor to our right was a fireman with a woman who was blackened from head to toe, barely alive, if alive at all.
Firefighter Peter Blaich
As we got to the third floor of the B stairway, we forced open an elevator door which was burnt on all three sides. The only thing that was remaining was the hoistway door. And inside the elevator were about I didnt recognize them initially, but a guy from 1 Truck said oh my God, those are people. They were pretty incinerated. And I remember the overpowering smell of kerosene. Thats when Lieutenant Foti said oh, thats the jet fuel. I remember it smelled like if youre camping and you drop a kerosene lamp.
The same thing happened to the elevators in the main lobby. They were basically blown out. I dont recall if I actually saw people in there.
What got me initially in the lobby was that as soon as we went in, all the windows were blown out, and there were one or two burning cars outside. And there were burn victims on the street there, walking around. We walked through this giant blown-out window into the lobby.
There was a lady there screaming that she didnt know how she got burnt. She was just in the lobby and then next thing she knew she was on fire. She was burnt bad. And somebody came over with a fire extinguisher and was putting water on her.
Thats the first thing that got me. That and in front of one of the big elevator banks in the lobby was a desk and I definitely made out one of the corpses to be a security guard because he had a security label on his jacket. Im assuming that maybe he was at a table still in a chair and almost completely incinerated, charred all over his body, definitely dead. And you could make out like a security tag on his jacket. And I remember seeing the table was melted, but he was still fused in the chair and that elevator bank was melted, so I imagine the jet fuel must have blown right down the elevator shaft and I guess caught the security guard at a table, I guess at some type of checkpoint.
Brian Reeves,
a 34-year-old security guard, was nearly killed while making the rounds in the lobby of 1 World Trade Center on September 11. He started to run after hearing an explosion that he said sounded like a missile, but he was knocked down by a fireball that roared down the elevator shaft. Reeves suffered third-degree burns to 40 percent of his body before he was able to pat out the flames. He was one of 20 critically-injured patients rushed to New York Presbyterian’s burn unit that day.
David Kravette, a managing director of Cantor Fitzgerald,
``I saw a couple of elevators in free fall; you could hear them whizzing down and as they crashed, there was this huge explosion, like a fireball exploding out of the bank of elevators,'' Kravette said. ``People were engulfed in flames.''
Meldrum Fire engine driver
noticed that all windows in the high lobby were blown out. Glass and marble from busted walls littered the floors, crunched underfoot. He caught an occasional whiff of jet fuel, a smell like kerosene, wafting from elevator shafts. On the floor by the elevators he saw burned people.
Firefighter Joseph Casaliggi:
We went into the lobby. The lobby actually looked like the plane hit the lobby.
Greg Manning, about his wife
For those of you who may not know the story, she was entering the lobby of the North Tower of the World Trade Center when a fireball exploded from the elevator shaft. She and two others managed to run out of the building, all three of them on fire. A passerby across the street ran to them, reaching Lauren first, and put the flames out. He then put Lauren in an ambulance, so she was the first person evacuated. He certainly saved her life.
Mike Pecoraro:
"When I walked out into the lobby, it was incredible," he recalled. "The whole lobby was soot and black, elevator doors were missing. The marble was missing off some of the walls. 20-foot section of marble, 20 by 10 foot sections of marble, gone from the walls". The west windows were all gone. They were missing. These are tremendous windows. They were just gone. Broken glass everywhere, the revolving doors were all broken and their glass was gone. Every sprinkler head was going off. I am thinking to myself, how are these sprinkler heads going off? It takes a lot of heat to set off a sprinkler head. It never dawned on me that there was a giant fireball that came through the air of the lobby. I never knew that until later on. The jet fuel actually came down the elevator shaft, blew off all the (elevator) doors and flames rolled through the lobby. That explained all the burnt people and why everything was sooted in the lobby."
William Rodriguez
And at that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm well aware of NISTNCSTAR1-7 and your bible 911 Myths.
Now all of you need to do to prove the fireball theory is to connect all of these alleged "eye witness" accounts to the jet fuel and you've cracked it.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
The tale of Mike Pecoraro:
| Quote: | The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.
They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. |
There's that fireball again ........... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | I'm well aware of NISTNCSTAR1-7 and your bible 911 Myths.
Now all of you need to do to prove the fireball theory is to connect all of these alleged "eye witness" accounts to the jet fuel and you've cracked it. |
Ah, you don't like eye witness accounts do you, you would much rather scoff in the abstract. Do you think the fact that so many mention kerosene has any significance in relation to jet fuel, or is it a strange coincidence?
The fact is that there are many witnesses to a fireball coming down the lift shafts and stairwells, and if a fireball can come down, then so can a pressure wave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | The tale of Mike Pecoraro:
| Quote: | The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.
They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. |
There's that fireball again ........... |
Maybe I was too subtle. BW, do you honestly belive that your fireball, from 100 stories up, can do the type of damage described here in the sub-basement? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | The tale of Mike Pecoraro:
| Quote: | The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.
They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. |
There's that fireball again ........... |
Maybe I was too subtle. BW, do you honestly belive that your fireball, from 100 stories up, can do the type of damage described here in the sub-basement? |
The man who saw the damage, Mike Pecoraro, believed it had been done by the fireball, and I have no difficulty believing he was right.
What I would find strange is if someone who wanted to demolish the tower would plant bombs in the basement to do some minor amount of damage an hour before they planned to bring down the tower down. That really is inexplicable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | The tale of Mike Pecoraro:
| Quote: | The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.
They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. |
There's that fireball again ........... |
Maybe I was too subtle. BW, do you honestly belive that your fireball, from 100 stories up, can do the type of damage described here in the sub-basement? |
The man who saw the damage, Mike Pecoraro, believed it had been done by the fireball, and I have no difficulty believing he was right.
What I would find strange is if someone who wanted to demolish the tower would plant bombs in the basement to do some minor amount of damage an hour before they planned to bring down the tower down. That really is inexplicable. |
I think he is wrong, a fireball would not have sufficient explosive tower to cause that sort of destruction. What do you think?
As for the second part of your reply, do you really think that is a minor amount of damage? Seriously? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eogz
Validated Poster
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That pressure wave as the building fell, certainly looked like a squib to me.
I'm not an engineer in any sense of the word.
However if I wanted to bring a building down covertly, i wouldn't want to see too many squibs as it came down.
I would imagine a pressure wave would not manifest as a squib, perhaps i am wrong, the squibs or the pressure wave were the first thing that opened my eyes to the possibility of things not being quite as they semed on that day.
I'm still not convinced it wasn't a demolition, i've yet to see a convincing jet fuel/fire/weakened steel theory.
The non fire blackened, damaged lobby (don't even get me started on the bombs/explosions in the basement) is a kicker too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | Bushwacker wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | The tale of Mike Pecoraro:
| Quote: | The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.
They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. |
There's that fireball again ........... |
Maybe I was too subtle. BW, do you honestly belive that your fireball, from 100 stories up, can do the type of damage described here in the sub-basement? |
The man who saw the damage, Mike Pecoraro, believed it had been done by the fireball, and I have no difficulty believing he was right.
What I would find strange is if someone who wanted to demolish the tower would plant bombs in the basement to do some minor amount of damage an hour before they planned to bring down the tower down. That really is inexplicable. |
I think he is wrong, a fireball would not have sufficient explosive tower to cause that sort of destruction. What do you think?
As for the second part of your reply, do you really think that is a minor amount of damage? Seriously? |
I think the energy represented by the fuel in the plane was sufficient to raise a 110 ton plane 30,000 feet in the air and fly it across a continent at 500mph, so I have no trouble imagining that a fraction of it could do the damage described.
I meant it was a minor amount of damage compared to demolishing the entire structure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
