| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:02 am Post subject: Notice the explosion... |
 |
|
...on the corner edge, well above the "plane" damage area on the south tower just as collapse initiates.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sidlittle
Minor Poster
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 61
Location: A13
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| i can see two. one is already lit up from the start of the clip ferther down and to the lower right. and then another in the middle of the picture near the corner. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Whilst I am not saying they aren't explosions, would we not expect a building on fire coupled with all kinds of internal stresses and pressure and heat anomalies, to exhibit bursts of discharge as a result? Yes, they may well be explosions but can we be in any way certain as to their origin or suggest they are man-made designed to bring the building down?
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
With white hot flashes as seen here we can safely discount natural causes. A good find this clip. Now all we need is some shills to come along and explain this away, or try... 
_________________
Make love, not money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermate wrote: | | With white hot flashes as seen here we can safely discount natural causes. A good find this clip. Now all we need is some shills to come along and explain this away, or try... |
There are identical 'white hot flashes' on the other tower at the same time. What does this indicate?
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kc
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 359
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | There are identical 'white hot flashes' on the other tower at the same time. What does this indicate? |
No idea, but as a sceptic, I'll certainly put me hand up and agree I can see them |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd like to point out that the animation is slowed down to show the explosion.
It is 25 frames of a 30 frames per second video. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermate wrote: | | With white hot flashes as seen here we can safely discount natural causes. A good find this clip. Now all we need is some shills to come along and explain this away, or try... |
Not much chance of that. We're not allowed to criticise anything out here.
_________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kc
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 359
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| we all talking about the one about two thirds up the near corner? Seems a bit high to place charges? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bring it over to CC and we'll have a good old chin-wag.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kc wrote: | | we all talking about the one about two thirds up the near corner? Seems a bit high to place charges? |
Seeing as the building is already coming down...
_________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Johnny Pixels wrote: | | kc wrote: | | we all talking about the one about two thirds up the near corner? Seems a bit high to place charges? |
Seeing as the building is already coming down... |
Oh, I didn't realise you got squibs when a building collapses.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dogsmilk
Mighty Poster
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 1616
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | With white hot flashes as seen here we can safely discount natural causes. A good find this clip. Now all we need is some shills to come along and explain this away, or try... |
Ooooohhhh! I know!, I know!
- Isn't the official 'critical' explanation for such things that it's 'breaking glass making reflections'? I'm sure I've seen that a few times.
Can a critic confirm this?
Do I get a prize? - a weekend break at JREF maybe?
Though to me, it certainly looks like a bit of an explosion.
_________________
It's a man's life in MOSSAD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| physicist wrote: | | Johnny Pixels wrote: | | kc wrote: | | we all talking about the one about two thirds up the near corner? Seems a bit high to place charges? |
Seeing as the building is already coming down... |
Oh, I didn't realise you got squibs when a building collapses.
|
Didn't you?
To quote NIST: As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially.
These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed. In all cases, they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building through windows or between columns on the mechanical floors. Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses, perhaps due to falling walls or portions of a floor. Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building.
_________________
".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kc
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 359
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I was thinking more like a support beam snapping but the nist explanation makes sense I suppose, pretty closed enviroment suddenly has massive pressure influx and egress. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's a fair cop.
The little explosion shoots out, rotates a few times, and is then seen falling for a while.
This leads to the disintegration of the entire top section of the building, which stops it rotating.
physicist - have you ever run any of this past your fellow Members of the Institute of Physics ? What do they say about it?
Or submitted any of your analysis to "Physics World" for perusal or even publication?
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | It's a fair cop.
The little explosion shoots out, rotates a few times, and is then seen falling for a while.
This leads to the disintegration of the entire top section of the building, which stops it rotating. |
No, Ignatz, I don't think you can go that far. It was just one observation.
| Ignatz wrote: | physicist - have you ever run any of this past your fellow Members of the Institute of Physics ? What do they say about it?
Or submitted any of your analysis to "Physics World" for perusal or even publication? |
Happy New Year. Now get back under your bridge. Who let him out?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | To quote NIST: As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially. |
Did NIST say anything about the floors above? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is the GENERAL forum!!! If the liars aren't going to stay in their sewer why not ban them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | | Thermate wrote: | | With white hot flashes as seen here we can safely discount natural causes. A good find this clip. Now all we need is some shills to come along and explain this away, or try... |
There are identical 'white hot flashes' on the other tower at the same time. What does this indicate? |
If the white flash on the collapsing building is an explosion, why does the identical white flash on the other building not build in intensity and brightness? It just stays the same for several seconds - explosions do not do that. Or is the manifestation on the right hand tower something different altogther??
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Last edited by telecasterisation on Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:44 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kc
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 359
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mods, can we move this to CC then?
Blackcat, if I'm a liar, please note my first post on this thread which was "yup, I can see the explosions" - thats a lie then is it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| physicist wrote: | | Bushwacker wrote: | | To quote NIST: As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially. |
Did NIST say anything about the floors above? |
No, but the same would logically apply to the falling top section as its lower stories were crushed. It looks rather as though there is a collapse on the other side of the building at the same level as that smoke. Interestingly, on the longer clip, it looks as though smoke is coming out prior to the collapse, so an air passage already exists, which the collapse somehow forces a lot more air and smoke through. It cannot be a demolition explosion because there is no effect on the building, and there is certainly not a line of explosions.
_________________
".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Off to CC it is then
Hold on everybody!
*FAZZAMM*
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| physicist wrote: | | Johnny Pixels wrote: | | kc wrote: | | we all talking about the one about two thirds up the near corner? Seems a bit high to place charges? |
Seeing as the building is already coming down... |
Oh, I didn't realise you got squibs when a building collapses.
|
Above the collapse zone? That building is already falling, and yet an explosive is needed above the collapse point to do what?
_________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | This is the GENERAL forum!!! If the liars aren't going to stay in their sewer why not ban them? |
So if you criticise NPT in the general forum, do you get banned too? Or Beam Weapon Theory? Or some space alien theory?
_________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just out of interest truthers, when the tower collapses in these videos, what causes all the black smoke and fire to puff outwards from the collapse point?
_________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Johnny Pixels wrote: | | blackcat wrote: | | This is the GENERAL forum!!! If the liars aren't going to stay in their sewer why not ban them? |
So if you criticise NPT in the general forum, do you get banned too? Or Beam Weapon Theory? Or some space alien theory? |
It's fairly simple Mr Pixels
If one's position is "9/11 is an inside job", but one questions various elements of the possible theories, one can post anywhere on the forum: after all, not all the possibilities can be right, some are mutually exclusive
However, if one's position is "9/11 is not an inside job", and therefore by extension one questions every element of every possibility apart from the Government endorsed wacko nut job conspiracy theory, then one may only post in critics corner
And if that is too complex, or not to an individuals liking, they are of course under no duress to continue to post here at all, which I suppose could count as "banning" oneself
Ways to get banned by the site admin include suggesting nasty things should happen to people who still accept the official theory, or suggesting the campaign is run by people with an irrational hatred of a particular ethnicity
Simply being annoyingly pedantic is, at the moment, not a cause for concern
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | physicist wrote: | | Johnny Pixels wrote: | | kc wrote: | | we all talking about the one about two thirds up the near corner? Seems a bit high to place charges? |
Seeing as the building is already coming down... |
Oh, I didn't realise you got squibs when a building collapses.
|
Didn't you?
To quote NIST: As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially.
These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed. In all cases, they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building through windows or between columns on the mechanical floors. Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses, perhaps due to falling walls or portions of a floor. Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building. |
nice theory but nowhere do we see evidence of this after collapse, i mean you'd expect to see at least the last few floors stacked up on top of each other. but we dont. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
