View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Duke Minor Poster
Joined: 25 Jun 2006 Posts: 24 Location: Scotland
|
Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:35 pm Post subject: Setting up the explosives wtc |
|
|
Does anyone have information how long it would take to set up large demolition, oh I dunno ...say wtc 7, and taking into consideration when the 2nd plane hit and how long the fire burned for...does it work out?
Thankyou in advance for all your constuctive feedback
Duke
Description: |
|
Filesize: |
190.5 KB |
Viewed: |
102 Time(s) |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Johnson Mighty Poster
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 1919 Location: Derbyshire
|
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Please post this sort of thing in the "General" section - it isn't really a news tory.
Apparently, the minimum time to set up a controlled demolition for a building this size is 1 month. Landmark Towers in Texas apparently took 4 months:
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/video/ShorterClips/news8LandMarkDemo lition.wmv
For a job like that, in an occupied building, my guess would be probably over a period of 6 months.
People who question the demolition proof (I am not sure whether you are or aren't) seem to not fully accept:
1) Collapse into own footprint
2) Speed of collapse
3) Pyroclastic dust flow (not just a *cloud* of dust)
_________________ Andrew
Ask the Tough Questions, Folks! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
orestes Moderate Poster
Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 113
|
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is an interesting alternative view.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/04/911-7-man-job.html
I think we have been back and forth on this question on this forum as it is one of those things that sceptics think is 'obviously' wrong with 'conspiracy theories'. But as Andrew was implying it is only relevant if it is physically impossible - or at least beyond comprehension - that the bombs could have been laid. Otherwise, and clearly that is the case, we must examine the evidence we do have that is not speculative, and Andrew supplied the basic elements.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
brian Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 611 Location: Scotland
|
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We had the expert view of Romero - at least for a short period - which implied it was a relatively easy task.
--"There was one highly qualified engineer in New Mexico who thought the collapse could only happen with the help of demolition explosives, and he was foolish enough to make the statement publicly.
Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures.
"It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points," Romero said. --
http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/physics_1.html
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wokeman Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Jul 2005 Posts: 881 Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brian,
Except that someone had a chat with him in a corridor or a field somewhere and he changed his mind.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|