Hillary Clinton and 9/11

a reply to: neutronflux


The façade is a façade. You know how the building was made of and how it fell and you know what I mean by uniformity.

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork
a reply to: neutronflux


The façade is a façade. You know how the building was made of and how it fell and you know what I mean by uniformity.

No, i don’t know what you mean. Because the video and audio of WTC 7 is nothing like a CD.

One, no audible detonations with enough energy to cut steel.

Two, video of WTC 7 clearly shows the building already suffered significant internal collapse before the facade began to fall. One of the roof penthouses completely fell in to WTC 7 before the facade began to collapse?

www.nist.gov...

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line—involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, and 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.
The probable collapse sequence is described in NIST NCSTAR Report 1A, Section 2.4 and NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Chapter 13.

ws680.nist.gov...

The NIST time individuals cite for WTC 7 collapse is from the noth face of the facade. Can you quote from NIST the total collapse of WTC 7? And the penthouse shows WTC 7 was collapsing before the north face began to move.

www.nist.gov...

To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.

What happens with the theory of WTC 7 symmetrical collapse when you look at the other sides of the building than the north face?

www.debunking911.com...

And now comes the most important and telling fact in this photo. Note the west side (Right side in this photo) of the north face is pointing toward the east side (Left side of this photo) where the penthouse was. What caused this? It would not be unreasonable to expect the building to fall toward the path of least resistance. The path of least resistance in this case would be the hole in the back of the building and the hole left by the penthouse. Since the penthouse was on the east and the 20 story hole in the middle, that would make the east and middle the path of least resistance. The conspiracy sites agree with this theory but say it never happened. They say the fact that it didn't happen helps prove controlled demolition. But you see it happen here... What will they say now?

More here at link

WTC 7 Collapse Symmetrical?.mov
AlienEntity1
m.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Fermy
The pair of you ask for credible explanations but give none yourself.

What is there even to debunk with WTC 7 conspiracy CD theories?

Jones’s thermite paper was fraudulently peer reviewed. The results of the experiments he did release cannot been replicated by others. Jones will no release results of testing WTC dust in an inert atmosphere.

You will not cite credible evidence of detonations at WTC 7 with the force and energy to cut steel columns? Is there a source citing credible evidence of detonations at WTC 7 with the energy and power to cut steel columns?

So what is there to debunk concerning WTC 7 CD when there is no evidence of CD?

a reply to: mrthumpy

As opposed to evade?

a reply to: neutronflux

Point to proof of a detonation with enough power to cut steel? No witnesses pressure wave? No audible detonation indicative of a charge with the energy to cut steel? No demolition shrapnel? No seismic evidence?

Just because the way you think a building is demolished, doesn't mean there isn't other non-traditional methods, especially when it is so posed to be an inside job. You really think they were just going to use the run of the mill super loud explosives? That would have gave it away as soon as it happened, lol.

WTC 7’s core columns were hollow box columns, here's an example.. If a device were to be placed 'inside' the box columns or inside elevator shafts, the sound of the explosions would remain captured within, causing the instant fail without the noise or visuals of flash.

Not that I'm saying I know exactly how it was done, but I am saying, think non-traditional.

a reply to: kyleplatinum

The conspiracists are the ones that put themselves in a corner.

One: Stating the resistance of each floor had to be removed. What? That makes 10? 20 Charges per floor? For a 47 story building, that is at least 470 charges?

Two: False narratives of “looks” like a CD and fell “symmetrically”? By cherry picking the north facade, and ignoring the other sides of WTC 7.

Three: government technologies are based on very public scientific studies and theories. For example, first nuclear reactors based on very public theories concerning atomic/ nuclear physics. Please cite scientific theories on explosives that can release a pressure wave with enough energy to instantly cut steel without creating a sound wave or flash? No seismic activity? The slower the technology cuts steel, the harder it would be to time a collapse that “looks” like CD.

Four: Government technologies usually are about 20 years ahead of the mainstream. What emerging technologies can you point to for your fakse narratives of CD over 15 years ago that could be used at WTC 7? Many people would be interested in a completely quite CD system that produces no shockwave, no detectable seismic activity, and no demolitions shrapnel.

Five: The high tech sophisticated floor to floor CD system that had to exist to produce the witness rate of collapse would still need to survive hours of floor to floor fires.

Six: No evidence of columns cut floor to floor. No evidence of thousands of feet of detonation wire and hundreds of igniters.

What do you get in there is no truth to the narratives conspiracists have been pushing concerning WTC 7 CD?

a reply to: kyleplatinum

Then what scientific theories can you envoke to create a case? Technologies that would be sought by the demolitions professions? Technologies that should be in the pipelines to be mainstream from research in other countries.

You still are ignoring?

A CD system that could provide the required burn time.

The physics it takes x amount of energy to instantly cut steel.

The claims the CD system had to be floor to floor.

No evidence of columns cut floor to floor.

The CD system had to survive floor to floor fires for hours.

There is no evidence of CD at WTC 7