Federal Grand Jury To Hear Evidence - World Trade Center 9-11 Was Controlled Demolition.

a reply to: neutronflux
Did only the north tower collapse?

You don't understand this material.

Your entire counter argument hinges on laser lady's seismic analysis.

No one but you thinks the attacks didn't produce primary and secondary seismic waves.

Only you

a reply to: mrthumpy

No, you didn't read it and don't know the scope and aim of what it says.

Cancer rates. They are too high for this event, comparable to disasters like Chernobyl.

That is the conclusion of the study and all I stated.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux
Did only the north tower collapse?

You don't understand this material.

Your entire counter argument hinges on laser lady's seismic analysis.

No one but you thinks the attacks didn't produce primary and secondary seismic waves.

Only you

Again

Then it should be easy for you to produce a seismic graph from Manhattan that shows more than one wave component from Manhattan for 9/11.

The seismic charts you have posted so far in this thread of the WTC on 9/11 only shows one seismic wave component that are Rayleigh waves.

Why couldn’t you have a seismic event that only produced Rayleigh waves with a magnitude of 2.3, or 2.5, or even 3.

And a 2.5 magnitude seismic spike historically does no cause serious damage to structures.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: mrthumpy

No, you didn't read it and don't know the scope and aim of what it says.

Cancer rates. They are too high for this event, comparable to disasters like Chernobyl.

That is the conclusion of the study and all I stated.

Weird that you're arguing with the article you posted

a reply to: mrthumpy

Weird that you supposedly read a study limited to cancer rates and think its about something else.

It's like you only skimmed through it and looked for ammo so as to argue.

a reply to: neutronflux

As easy as it is for you to read the plethora of seismic analysis I posted that explain the characteristics of the primary and secondary waves for each event in question.

Only you and lazer lady claim there were no common seismic waves recorded during 911.

The burden of proof is on you. I actually already quoted the S and P wave characteristics of the WTC 2 collapse.

The same way I had to show evidence of what I claim, and so did. Several times. You must if this "conversation" can continue.

If you do not, do not bother replying to me anymore. Fun is over unless you can do some homework.

a reply to: tadaman

That is your replay to four cited sources that clearly states no P and S waves from the WTC on 9/11 or/and there is zero seismic evidence of detonations from the WTC on 9/11.

Then produce the seismic chart that shows more than one seismic wave component coming from the WTC on 9/11.

Vertical, East-West, North-South, all recorded frequencies.

























anssne.ldeo.columbia.edu...

The analog records were not released publicly as far as I know, though they are given upon request.

There is nothing special about Primary or secondary waves.

The tag team duo here have no idea what they are.

They just saw a YouTube video that said as much. They also like to quote that the north tower produced no secondary waves. It's a shame that wasn't the only building or seismic event in question.

I'm on my phone. Please just go to the links offered.

I only posted this because I wanted the images in my upload space. No one here is a seismologist and its useless information to most, especially bumbly poo.

a reply to: tadaman

Again, there are no P and S waves that are indicative of a detonation of a nuclear bomb from the WTC.

No P and S waves from a detonation. The observed seismic waves were only Rayleigh waves with a frequency to slow to be attributed to detonations.

Seismic Waves Generated by Aircraft Impacts and Building Collapses at World Trade Center, New York City.

www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

Comparison with Signals from Earthquakes, Gas Explosion and Mine Collapse
The signals at PAL from Collapse 2 and a small felt earthquake beneath the east side of Manhattan on January 17, 2001 are of comparable amplitude and ML (Fig. 4). The character of the two seismograms, however, is quite different. Clear P and S waves are seen only for the earthquake. The 7-km depth of the earthquake suppressed the excitation of short- period Rg,
3
which is so prominent for the collapse. The difference in the excitation of higher frequencies also can be attributed to the short time duration of slip in small earthquakes compared to the combined source time of several seconds of the complex system of the towers and foundations responding to the impacts and collapses. The waves from the WTC events resemble those recorded by regional stations from the collapse of part of a salt mine in western New York on March 12, 1994 (ML 3.6). That source also lasted longer than that of a small earthquake. A truck bomb at the WTC in 1993, in which approximately 0.5 tons of explosive were detonated, was not detected seismically, even at a station only 16 km away.
An explosion at a gasoline tank farm near Newark NJ on January 7, 1983 generated observ- able P and S waves and short-period Rg waves (ML 3) at PAL. Its Rg is comparable to that for WTC collapse 2. Similar arrivals were seen at station AMNH in Manhattan, which is no longer operating, at a distance of 15 km. AMNH also recorded a prominent seismic arrival at the time expected for an atmospheric acoustic wave. We know of no microbarograph recordings of either that explosion or the events at the WTC. Many people asked us if the arrivals at seismic stations from the WTC events propagated in the atmosphere. We find no evidence of waves arriving at such slow velocities. Instead the seismic waves excited by impacts and collapses at the WTC are short-period surface waves, i.e. seismic waves traveling within the upper few kilometers of the crust.

a reply to: neutronflux

A "sharp spike of short duration" is how seismologist Thorne Lay of Univ. of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph. 

The two unexplained spikes are more than twenty times the amplitude of the other seismic waves associated with the collapses and occurred in the East-West seismic recording as the buildings began to fall. 

Lerner-Lam told AFP that a 10-fold increase in wave amplitude indicates a 100-fold increase in energy released. These "short-period surface waves," reflect "the interaction between the ground and the building foundation," according to a report from Columbia Earth Institute. 

"The seismic effects of the collapses are comparable to the explosions at a gasoline tank farm near Newark on January 7, 1983," the Palisades Seismology Group reported on Sept. 14, 2001. 

911review.com...

If it was the building collapsing the amplitude would be similar in the N-S direction as well with observable effects in the vertical plane.

The amplitude and direction point not to identical and uniform tower collapses.

They point to a directed eruption of energy GOING UP the buildings with different amplitude!

a reply to: tadaman

What do you not get about

Instead the seismic waves excited by impacts and collapses at the WTC are short-period surface waves, i.e. seismic waves traveling within the upper few kilometers of the crust.
www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

The above is from a published paper by

A Morning That Shook the World: The Seismology of 9/11

blogs.ei.columbia.edu...

Their first product, coauthored by 12 Lamont seismologists and grad students, was a November 2001 paper published by the American Geophysical Union describing the waves generated by the attacks, their potential effects, and the precise timing of each event.

I am sorry that you don’t get the seismic data from the WTC determined by “12 Lamont seismologists and grad students” is not comprised of P and S waves.

Testimonials:

The Best Evidence

A combination of testimonial and physical evidence shows the official story – in any of its versions – to be false. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has been quoted as saying: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse the structure.” [5]

A combination of testimonial and physical evidence suggests that this was what happened.

Testimonial Evidence

Many firefighters and others reported explosions below the impact and fire floors. For example:

Genelle Guzman, the last survivor to be rescued from the WTC 1 rubble, reports that when she got down to the 13th floor some 20 minutes before the North Tower collapsed, she heard a “big explosion” and “[t]he wall I was facing just opened up, and it threw me on the other side.”

Firefighter Edward Cachi said: “As my officer and I were looking at the South Tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. … [I]t went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.” [6]

Firefighter Kenneth Rogers said: “[T]here was an explosion in the South Tower [WTC 2]. … Floor after floor after floor. One floor under another after another and when it hit about the fifth floor, I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing.” [7]

Stephen Evans, a New York-based correspondent for the BBC, said: “I was at the base of the second tower … that was hit. … There was an explosion. … The base of the building shook. … [T]hen there was a series of explosions.” [8]

Firefighter Louie Cacchioli reported that upon entering the WTC’s lobby, he saw elevator doors completely blown out. “I remember thinking,” he said, “how could this be happening so quickly if a plane hit way above?” When he reached the 24th floor, he encountered heavy dust and smoke, which he found puzzling in light of the fact that the plane had struck the building over 50 stories higher. [9]

There were also reports of explosions in the basements themselves. For example:

Janitor William Rodriguez reported that he and 14 others in the North Tower heard and felt an explosion below the first sub-level office before the aircraft impact, he said, the floor beneath his feet vibrated and “everything started shaking.” Seconds later, so he added, “I hear another explosion from way above. … Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane hitting the tower.” In any case, he said, co-worker Felipe David, who had been in front of a nearby freight elevator, came into the office with severe burns on his face and arms yelling, “explosion! explosion! explosion!” [10]

Rodriguez’s account was corroborated by José Sanchez, who was in the workshop on the fourth sub-level. Sanchez said that he and a co-worker heard a big blast that “sounded like a bomb,” after which “a huge ball of fire went through the freight elevator.” [11]

Engineer Mike Pecoraro, who was working in the North Tower’s sixth sub-basement, said that after an explosion he and a co-worker went up to the C level, where there was a small machine shop. “There was nothing there but rubble,” said Pecoraro. “We’re talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press – gone!” They then went to the parking garage, but found that it was also gone. Then on the B level, they found that a steel-and-concrete fire door, which weighed about 300 pounds, was wrinkled up “like a piece of aluminum foil.” [12]

www.consensus911.org...

Seismologists are scientists who study earthquakes. They also study how a quake’s energy spreads through Earth’s crust, as well as the deeper layers of our planet. The fastest seismic waves are known as P waves. That “p” stands for primary. And early seismologists called them that because these waves were the first to arrive at seismometers from some distant quake.

The next-fastest type of seismic waves are “secondary.” They earned that name because they were typically the second set to reach seismometers from a distant quake. Not surprisingly, they’re known as S waves.

Triangulation is only possible when there are accurate measurements of the times at which P waves and S waves show up at each seismometer. Some techniques use only the P waves.

Others also consider the time difference between the arrival of the first P waves and S waves. (The farther the distance between the seismometer and the source of the quake, the more exaggerated that time difference will be.)

Whatever method is used, it gives scientists only an estimate of how far from a seismometer the earthquake’s source happens to be. 

But scientists don’t just use these waves to map earthquakes. Those same seismic waves also can be generated by underground explosions. These might arise from a small blast inside an underground coal mine, for example. Or, they might signal the test detonation of a nuclear weapon (such as several that recently took place in North Korea). And P waves, in particular, can strongly point to whether the seismic waves come from a natural quake or an unnatural blast.

For seismic vibrations generated by an unnatural explosion, the first P wave to arrive at every seismometer will provide a “push.” Not only that, the P waves generated by an unnatural explosion are typically sharp and sudden. So they die away pretty quickly.

www.sciencenewsforstudents.org...

a reply to: tadaman

A detonation with the force to cut steel columns would have produced P and S waves. The seismic waves from the WTC are too low in frequency to be from a detonation.

If you are claiming nukes people heard, then they most definitely would have been radiated and would have been deathly ill with in hours from radiation poisoning.

Would you like to keep posting items that debunk your own claims.

Can you produce evidence of shrapnel from explosions?

An explosion with the force to cut steel columns should sound around 130 dB, and would have been heard for blocks. Would have created a very obvious pressure wave.

We know of no microbarograph recordings of either that explosion or the events at the WTC. Many people asked us if the arrivals at seismic stations from the WTC events propagated in the atmosphere. We find no evidence of waves arriving at such slow velocities. Instead the seismic waves excited by impacts and collapses at the WTC are short-period surface waves, i.e. seismic waves traveling within the upper few kilometers of the crust.
www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

By seismic data, by lack of shrapnel, by no captured audio of a blast with the force to cut steel columns, the core fell last and had to be cut from the foundation, by no evidence of any over pressure event that created a pressure wave capable of cutting steel columns, there is zero evidence of a detonation with the force to cut steel columns.

Nobody is saying there was no explosions from items in the WTC, AC units explode when exposed to high temps for example which is expected, but there is no evidence of a detonation with the force to cut steel columns.

Why do you think Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth embraced fizzle no flash cutting charges. You know the largest 9/11 truth group.

Because there is no evidence of pressure waves from the WTC by detonations with the energy to cut steel columns.

a reply to: neutronflux

Shrapnel? In an underground explosion?

Instantly dead from thermal radiation?

If I may ask, what do you do or what is your specialty?

Edit to add:
I get it you didn't actually read the nuclear demolition theory.

It doesn't involve "cutting steel columns"

Hint: it has to do with the vibrating or "crunch layer" after the initial expansion that shatters matter almost completely in underground nuclear detonations. TO DUST.

LoL

Read it, for once. Videos may be just cliff notes.
Something might ring a bell.

Edit to add

P.s.drop the P & S BS.

a reply to: neutronflux

Only because this has to stop once and forever.

A detonation with the force to cut steel columns would have produced P and S waves. The seismic waves from the WTC are too low in frequency to be from a detonation. 

False. Any force with sufficient energy to be recorded by any seismograph would produce S and P waves. This describes their time of arrival.

"Too low frequency" what were too low frequency? The "freaking waves" were? The first and last recorded in order to make a graph, were too low frequency?

What was their frequency? And why is that too low?

You know what was too high? A 20X jump in amplitude. That's bonkers.

Edit to add more:

What you quoted about "No microbarograph recordings"

Those are not part of the seismic data.

Microbarograph. Microbarograph, or simply called a barograph, records atmospheric pressure in millibars adjusted to sea level. A continuous record of pressure changes is recorded on a rotating cylinder wrapped precisely with graph paper.

My guess is Mrs woods, laser lady, was disproving the Columbia U explanation for the surrounding buildings creating varied pressure, causing the shockwave to reverberate back into the towers.

Atmospheric recordings like these would be helpful in disproving that aspect of the official story. Maybe she was saying as much and you simply didn't understand. Go ahead and check.

a reply to: tadaman

What are you babbling about.

So? what did your fantasy nuclear detonation supposedly initiate.

We know it didn’t fracture the bedrock at Manhattan, they built new skyscrapers at the WTC.

We know the slurry wall was not breached.

We know the twin tower cores were not compromised from the foundation all the way up to the points of buckling at the points contracting floors trusses caused bowing in the vertical steel columns. The core columns had to be cut from the foundation to be removed during cleanup. And there no frozen pools of steel at the foundation.

We know the cores from just under the points of jet impacts down to the foundation offered resistance during collapse, the core fell at 40 percent the rate of free fall, and the core fell last after the complete collapse of the floor system. This also rules out a void under the twin towers causing a drop core.

Minutes before each tower collapsed, there was structural buckling and leaning. Was this before supposed detonations?

There is no evidence of dust rising off the ground, dust being shaken from the towers, or evidence of a shockwave raising up through the twin towers before collapse.


Please explain how a magical detonation causes no effect in the twin towers, no foundation damage, and with the collapse initiation starting at the points of jet impacts?

a reply to: neutronflux

What are you babbling about. 

So?

So? Lol.

At this point what difference does it make right?

And with that I say good bye. Poor form.

a reply to: tadaman

What are you talking about?

Seismic Waves in Greater New York City Area
Six stations within the greater Metropolitan New York region (Fig. 2) recorded the two tower collapses. Vertical-component records are shown in Figure 3 as a record section of distance as a function of travel time. The dotted lines indicate velocities from 1.5 to 2.5 km/s assuming prop- agation along straight paths from the WTC to the stations. Unlike signals at distant stations, the predominant waves are surface waves of short period (about 1 s) called Rg with group velocities between 2.3 and 1.5 km/s. GPD only recorded horizontal components.
www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

There was no P or S waves from Manhattan on 9/11

a reply to: tadaman

You

False. Any force with sufficient energy to be recorded by any seismograph would produce S and P waves. This describes their time of arrival.

What a blatantly false statement.
Not if the event only produced Rayleigh or surface waves.