Physics Prof Says Bombs not Planes brought down wtc

Did you notice how it didn't slow down, too? Same, steady speed all the way down, despite the great amounts of energy that would have been used up on each floor if it was falling via gravity. You'd think it would lose momentum and slow after so many floors, but apparently not.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Did you notice how it didn't slow down, too? Same, steady speed all the way down, despite the great amounts of energy that would have been used up on each floor if it was falling via gravity. You'd think it would lose momentum and slow after so many floors, but apparently not.

I’m curious, In all of those videos of actual implosions, have you ever noticed any hesitation as the floors fell in those? Remember that they only knock out the columns on a few of the floors, the rest of the floors fall and “pancake” on their own, so you would expect to see this loss of momentum in those videos also.

First, the blossoming down, mushrooming of the dustcloud, obstructs any viable floor destruction counting, with the aid of slow motion techniques, aided perhaps with a metronome.

Secondly, we also encounter the problem of the still standing totally intact outer core wall, lower than (under) the advancing down collapse dust cloud, obstructing our view of what exactly happened inside the buildings.

I only see perfectly intact outer walls all around the buildings in several videos taken from different viewpoints, getting consumed first by the blossoming down dustclouds, before ever having a chance to see what exactly happened at the actual collapse demolition front, not visible under that umbrella of dust, still a lot higher up in those clouds.

Do we have any closeup videos, where we can see if actually floors and ceilings rims were falling down behind window glass, before the collapse front reached them and obstructed our view?

And under what angle to the horizontal the floors were falling.
Negative or positive. Or horizontal.

If under a negative downwards angle, then that means that the inner core collumns at that observation level are probably falling faster, while the outer wall is moving or buckling and falls later and slower.
"Probably", since a falling upper floor piece could break a floor part in the middle, while we can't see that event, only its effect, the negative angle of the floor rim and ceiling rim seen through windows. And in that case, the floor ends would still be connected to the core and the outer wall, at the same heights. Those end connections would be perfectly in line, but we should conclude wrongly, that the core was moving faster as the outer wall.
That's why you need multiple observations from multiple videos, to be convinced that parts of the core were blown or melted earlier at lower levels as the advancing upper collapse.

If under a positive upwards angle, then that means that the inner core collumns at that observation level are falling slower, while the outer wall is falling first and faster.

If neutral, thus horizontal, that means that the floors are falling and both the inner and outer cores are still standing, or are falling down with the same speed, while the floors are falling faster.

If anybody still understands what I mean, hats off.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
I’m curious, In all of those videos of actual implosions, have you ever noticed any hesitation as the floors fell in those? Remember that they only knock out the columns on a few of the floors, the rest of the floors fall and “pancake” on their own, so you would expect to see this loss of momentum in those videos also.

I like how you try to counter the problem of the buildings not losing any momentum, by comparing them to other demolitions and saying its normal.

You're right. No loss of momentum is perfectly naturally for demolition. Had a change of heart regarding 9/11 recently? Anyway, thanks for supporting our cause.

In normal demolitions, the buildings are also destroyed in key places so the building will continue to fall under its own weight, via gravity. Without destroying these key places, buildings won't necessarily fall all the way down, depending on how big the building in question is. The WTC Towers were huge, of course, so if only one floor was blown out, the collapse would necessarily be stopped. It's insane to think those small caps could destroy everything below them, let alone without losing momentum all the while.

But, as you yourself provide, blow out floors here and there, and the buildings will fall via gravity with no slowing whatsoever.

A friend sent me this:

www.break.com...

Besides being freaking awesome, this illustrates for all those "how could you possibly program a demolition to come down like that" people how circuits can be programmed via computer. In this case, christmas lights are switched on and off, but ask any electrician, etc., and you'll be told it isn't a big leap from triggering christmas lights, to triggering pyrotechnics at a rock concert, or even all sorts of explosives to go off at certain pre-programmed times. Those can all be initiated with electric signals, or even remotely. And yes, remote-controlled demo charges do exist. The programming in that video looks incredibly complex, and yet the person behind it no doubt had much less at their disposal than the US military does. Makes programming the WTC explosives to come down as they did look like the work of a 4-year old.

Just thought I'd share. Seasons greetings! And merry solstice!

[edit on 5-12-2005 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Never in history has a plane that big slammed into a building that big. Second the WTC was not even built like alot of other steel framed buildings it had a unique engineering design.
[edit on 11-11-2005 by ShadowXIX]

Suggest you spend more time reading, less time talking.

history1900s.about.com...

Originally posted by CyberSEAL

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Never in history has a plane that big slammed into a building that big. Second the WTC was not even built like alot of other steel framed buildings it had a unique engineering design.
[edit on 11-11-2005 by ShadowXIX]

Suggest you spend more time reading, less time talking.

history1900s.about.com...

You might want to heed your own advice.

"Never in history has a plane that big slammed into a building that big."

A B-25 is in no way comparable to a Boeing 767.

The Empire State Building, although tall, is in no way comparable to the WTC towers.

Weren't you a tiny TITBIT surprised to see NIST blocking ALL their Pdf reports from copy/pasting?

Can you give me a reasonable explanation for that?
Much obliged if you can.

They didn't allow copy pasting?

Holy crap, I must be an elite hacker for clicking that picture of a camera in acrobat to take this.



And this.




Try again.



Oh and BTW, I do doubt the official story Labtop, just not the collapse part. It is possible to accept the collapse explanation like the vast majority of structural engineers do, and still not buy why we weren't prepared.

Not buying into a giant conspiracy to lace the buildings with bombs, thermite, and mini-nukes, does not mean I buy into everything they tell us about that day.

I'll be waiting for the WATS vote you promised.

Must be....because I have a problem copying and pasting NIST report...care to explain? By the way...NIST doesn't even give any scaled drawings or even the right dimensions of things...care to explain that?

From a NIST pdf: NIST NCSTAR 1-5A (Draft)
Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the
World Trade Center Disaster
Visual Evidence, Damage Estimates,
and Timeline Analysis (Draft)

It sounds like you guys are having trouble using acrobat.

Here is an illustrated suggestion.

LeftBehind, the Draft versions which you are using were copyable, however the final versions are locked up tighter than a Catholic Nun's....footlocker. The only way to copy from them is to take screencaps or to re-type text out manually.

You might want to get a hold of the final versions so that we are all talking about the same documents and page refs for future debates. Here's the link:

wtc.nist.gov...



[edit on 2005-12-8 by wecomeinpeace]

It seems to me that scientist or not, we have never before or since flown airplanes into a 100+ story building. Regardless of engineering specs, or temperature quotes there have been no tests. I dont doubt that Uncle Sam is misleading us in this, but the towers very well may have fallen because of the planes and the planes alone. The other building that EXPLODED on live tv without a plane hitting it, or much sizable debris hitting it is mighty fishy though.
I think the sad truth is we will never know. Atleast not soon enough for it to matter. My question is why do we continue to live in a country we cannot trust? Would you stay with a spouse that you had to question constantly? Our leaders lie, cheat, and steal for years regardless of who we elect (or try to elect). If there is any doubt that this was an inside job why the hell are we still living here? The revolution is drawing near...it only gets worse...

...................................... ..........................................

You have voted LeftBehind for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

On a sidenote, LeftBehind, the main sign of a truthfull, thorough researcher / scientist, is he reasons with consistency and realizes the consequences of publicizing faulty data.
Input does not always equal output.
If the former is sloppy, the latter will let you stumble from your high horse.

Believe it or not, I and a few more here, try to observe every bit of data we dig up, from both sides of the debate, before posting it, and if the data implicates an opposite of our view, we STILL post it, since true research is honest research.

i just found this interesing quote....

Ben Fountain, 42, a financial analyst with Fireman's Fund, was coming out of the Chambers Street Station, headed for his office on the 47th floor of the south tower.

How could they let this happen? They knew this building was a target. Over the past few weeks we'd been evacuated a number of times, which is unusual. I think they had an inkling something was going on. source

[edit on 8-12-2005 by billybob]

................................ ...................................

You have voted HowardRoark for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.

The debates at ATS wouldn't have been by far so interesting, without him, and are always salted with the grains Howard still throws in from time to time. He was one of the few reasons I came to this community, because of his gentleman-like behavior, even under the most vicious attacks, and he held many threads alive by steadily opposing baseless viewpoints.

These 2 awards show my respect for two debaters in the opposite aisles.
They, among others which I sadly enough have no vote left over for anymore, and us over here, are a remaining tiny island of research, in a vast ocean of ignorants of the true causes and effects of the events on 11 September 2001.

Footnote :
Two of my three Januari votes will definitely go to Bsbray and BillyBob, for their outstanding research and reasoning for so long already.

Let's see who earns my third one.
Where's CatHerder, is he now called MirthfullMe? And Aris? And EastCoastKid? And so many more, elbowing through the once massive crowds in these 9/11 threads, to throw their opinions into the debating corrals.
I dearly miss them lately.

[edit on 8/12/05 by LaBTop]

The most amazing story I heard was from a friend who received an e-mail right before the first plane crashed into the towers, from a friend of his who was on the flight -- actually on the flight from Boston to Los Angeles. The e-mail said, "We've been hijacked." And a minute later the plane crashed into the building. The person in the airplane had one of those little BlackBerry portable e-mail machines, and sent his e-mail, probably having no idea the plane was going to crash.

From your same source above.
Those 2 planes slashing in the WTC towers, must have flown fairly low during their last approach paths. Thus allowing everybody with a handphone, to place calls, send emails or SMS's.
They must have felt and seen (if there were really hijackers on board, who forced them to close the plastic window covers) that they were low over New York, at full speed, so why was there nearly no call from those 2 planes ???

Did we ever read somewhere that the "hijackers" told them to close the window covers? So the passengers would not understand what their intentions were, and try to overrun the "hijackers" in a last panic stricken sureness that their lifes were on the brink of ending.

I never saw anything like that written down.
On the contrary, one stewardess called outside, and mentioned she saw the buildings of New York, and then she made clear that she understood.

If the windows were not closed, why didn't more passengers, of whome most will have handphones, not call their loved ones at home, or whoever else they could get ahold of ?
I would, and then hit the next hijacker with my diplomate cabin suitcase, what the hell would a guy in a narrow aisle with a carpet cutter do against a blow with full force with a suitcase?
I would have decapitated him, or at least hit his head 90° around, if he was in the passenger cabine.

And do you realize how many improvizable weapons are laying around in an airplanes pantry, and how many pillows and blankets can be used to protect your arms, or strangle an opponent with? And the boiling water from the pantry. And the coffee cans. And the bottles of wine in the pantry. And the combination of toilet spraycans with a lit lighter, that's a medium range blowtorch.

For me, there's just one conclusion, all of most of these people were unconscious, or not at all present in those planes.
And all these FBI locked away tapes from passengers were faked calls from another position, why not from that oh so busy, that day, C-130 electronic warfare military plane?


I have looked deep into the passenger lists, it looked as if there was a statistically unusual high amount of elderly and far too young people onboard of all these planes, to be a possible threat to 3 or 4 possible hijackers.
And ofcourse the most appealing (to simple logic) fact, that their was a crazy low amount of passengers on all 4 planes, compared to flights with the same departure time window from other airlines which departed on the same day, in the same overall directions, for a comparable flight time.
Statistics can't LIE.

Huh? Double post!

[edit on 8/12/05 by LaBTop]

Here we go on an endless loop story, copyright by NIST :
wtc.nist.gov...

At the bottom of that page, you find 3 links :
Privacy Policy/Security Notice | Disclaimer | FOIA
If you click the first one, Privacy Policy/Security Notice,
www.nist.gov...
you will find not a word about Pdf protected files, only this quotation :

Accessibility: The National Institute of Standards and Technology is committed to making its web sites accessible to all NIST customers and staff in accordance with provisions of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998.

If you have difficulty obtaining information from any NIST Web site, please contact [email protected] to get the material in another format. You should provide the URL of the Web site referencing that information.

If you have any 508-related questions, comments, or suggestions for improvement, please contact the NIST Office of the Chief Information Officer by email at [email protected].

See NIST disclaimer.

Basicly, you perhaps have a chance to obtain Html versions of all their Final reports, if you send an email to [email protected] .
And if you'r the bulldog-type like character, you ofcourse file a complaint to [email protected] .
About the obvious slowdown of Internet discussion (regarding their "damage control reports", these reports have however nothing to do with even the bare basics of a forensic investigation of a crime, and crime scenes) caused by their Copy/Paste blockading.
But, you still have hope, so we proceed to their Disclaimer page :
www.nist.gov...

and some new hope arises, when you read this in hindsight hilarious remark :

Use of NIST Information

These World Wide Web pages are provided as a public service by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). With the exception of material marked as copyrighted, information presented on these pages is considered public information and may be distributed or copied. Use of appropriate byline/photo/image credits is requested.

See the NIST Privacy, Security Notice, and Accessiblity Statement

Aha, you think, there it is, at last :
Accessiblity Statement !!!
www.nist.gov...

You click it, and , lo and behold, you'r back at the first above link and quote !

We call that, running circles, endless loops and digging ditches in the process.

Not ONE written explanation why they felt the unstoppable need to block copying and pasting...... but we know very well by now.
This is the "burned soil tactic" from retreating armies, where everyone is aware of, but nobody can or will do something about it.

Especially not in that Punch and Judy Show most americans speak so afficiado of, those Pawnshops of pure Greed, the US Senate and the House.

Is there even one inhabitant there, who is not a millionaire or multimillionaire?

What's wrong with plain old logic and knowledge of life, inherited by so many intelligent, however middle and lower class americans?
Why is it, that the "don't haves" don't get a chance in 2 lifetimes to ever get voted in these pawnshops?

Because it's an "old boys fraternity", both of them.

YOU vote(d) for them, YOU will have to clean up house, or it will be no longer YOUR HOUSE.
It is no longer your house, for a long time passed already, but too many of you don't realize it even now.

We were on the same page WCIP, Labtop said

"Weren't you a tiny TITBIT surprised to see NIST blocking ALL their Pdf reports from copy/pasting?"

Not just the final reports.

While I do find it strange that the final reports have copy/paste disabled, I don't see any conspiracy. After all, it is available for free online. You can't copy/paste books either.

It is still very easy to take a screenshot of the report and post it all you want.

Example:

Originally posted by Labtop: Believe it or not, I and a few more here, try to observe every bit of data we dig up, from both sides of the debate, before posting it, and if the data implicates an opposite of our view, we STILL post it, since true research is honest research.

This is news to me. When have you ever posted something that disagrees with the demolition theory?

You have even gone so far as to post Joe Vialls as proof. Quite the opposite of what you say above.

While WCIP is in fact proud of his bias, I don't have the agenda that many of you seem to think I have. I have yet to see any convincing evidence for demolition. I see tons of speculation, quite a bit of outright falsehoods, but no "smoking gun". Couple that with no reasonable explanation of why it would be necessary to even go to such lengths, it still seems to me that the demo theory is pure fantasy. Wouldn't 9-11 have had the same effect without the buildings collapsing?

As to why I debate it so much, has more to do with me enjoying a good debate than it has to do with bias. I have taken a position, and until I see some actual hard evidence, I will stick with it and enjoy every post fighting in the trenches.


Edit: BTW Labtop, while the millionare thing might be true for the senate, the house of reprasentatives is a whole different story. You don't have to be a multimillionaire to join that madhouse. I wouldn't be surprised if some Reps are living only off the salary they make as a civil servant. It's a little bold of you to claim so much knowledge about a government in a country you don't live in. You do know that a high school student was just elected mayor over here, right?

[edit on 8-12-2005 by LeftBehind]