It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
WCIP found a plausible device, even if it does have to be pretty thick and have a couple of pounds of thermite. Does anyone have a plausible method of setting these things, putting bombs on every single floor, and then crashing planes precisely where the thermite was planted?
Originally posted by Vushta
Griff..But HOW was it rigged?
So you don't believe the controlled demo/bombs theory?
So much for the squibs. But how does severing a verticl column cause a building to collapse in such a manner. How does thermite cut horizontally? If a gap of say 1/2"or 1" was produced by being cut away by thermite how does this cause such a collapse?
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Well Griff that theory certainly makes more sense than the built-in explosives, or the "guy with backpack" theory, however I still see a few problems with it.
Marvin Bush.
The man was on the board of directors. He had no operational control that would allow him to do something like this. Even a CEO would have trouble with this as they would have to communicate their conspiracy through the people actually on the scene at the WTC. Not only that, but he was only on the board until fiscal year 2000.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Another problem. If you believe thermite was only used in the core, that red stuff dripping out of the building is not caused by thermite then? Wouldn't the thermite have to be at the perimeter for that?
Originally posted by LeftBehind
And finally. If you have no problem believing that the failure of a single floor caused by thermite could cause the collapse, why is it so hard to believe that a plane impact and the subsequent fires could cause it?
Originally posted by Vushta
Once you locate the proper spot for each set you have to remove the drywall or whatever the wallcovering is...and then..oh #..the steel is cover with fireproofing..better chip that off...hope no one notices...and then place the charggg....no wait..I have to prefail the steel by cutting thru it about 90%...gotta get the oxy/acet rig up here..hope nobody wonders why I'm cutting the beams..I'll just tell them I'm soldering some wires etc.
These facts WILL..NOT..GO..AWAY.
So the only avenue open to the CT is to claim some "new technique that no one knows about was used" or saying that "the explosives were there all along". Neither of these is remotely believable.
So when someone tries to say anything like "Stick it on the walls and...BOOM!"..I'm sorry, but it IS laughable and can't be taken seriously.
Originally posted by Vushta
Griff..But HOW was it rigged?
So you don't believe the controlled demo/bombs theory?
So much for the squibs. But how does severing a verticl column cause a building to collapse in such a manner. How does thermite cut horizontally? If a gap of say 1/2"or 1" was produced by being cut away by thermite how does this cause such a collapse?
Originally posted by Griff[/i
So, for it to have been a CD, they would have had to cut 90% of the steel? But, in your scenario of plane impacts and fire, no steel had to be cut? Why the double standard? If the buildings were shoddy enough for just a plane impact and fire to bring them down, why does all this prep work for the beams and columns have to be implemented? I still don't get the reasoning of it having to be weakened and perfectly organized for a CD but in a chaotic collapse from fire, none of this specialized prep work had to be done?
Correct.
What double standard? I'm saying that no steel had to be cut because it wasn't a CD.
If it was a CD all the prep has to be there.
The building weren't shoddy.
Your last sentence is apples to oranges.
These facts WILL..NOT..GO..AWAY.
Neither will the above mentioned facts.
So the only avenue open to the CT is to claim some "new technique that no one knows about was used" or saying that "the explosives were there all along". Neither of these is remotely believable.
Neither is plane impact and fire as the cause of collapse.
So when someone tries to say anything like "Stick it on the walls and...BOOM!"..I'm sorry, but it IS laughable and can't be taken seriously.
But yet a chaotic fire and plane impact aren't laughable and can be taken seriously? A chaotic bomb (plane) can achieve what would take months to design and implement? You guys are funny.
Neither will the above mentioned facts.
Neither is plane impact and fire as the cause of collapse.
But yet a chaotic fire and plane impact aren't laughable and can be taken seriously? A chaotic bomb (plane) can achieve what would take months to design and implement? You guys are funny.
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by Vushta
Griff..But HOW was it rigged?
So you don't believe the controlled demo/bombs theory?
So much for the squibs. But how does severing a verticl column cause a building to collapse in such a manner. How does thermite cut horizontally? If a gap of say 1/2"or 1" was produced by being cut away by thermite how does this cause such a collapse?
It was probably rigged the same way they rig thermite welding.
No, I don't believe that there were conventional bombs in the building. As far as the "squibs" and other things. They are anomylies that I can't explain. I'm just an engineer...not someone who knows air pressure physics etc.
I don't believe that the thermite was placed horizontally. I think it was placed at 45 degree angles. This would cause them to slip off using gravity as the driving force. That would cause the building to collapse in such a manner.
Let me ask you. If fire doesn't sever columns, how did the buildings collapse in such a manner? Something had to sever the columns to initiate collapse.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Marvin Bush.
The man was on the board of directors. He had no operational control that would allow him to do something like this. Even a CEO would have trouble with this as they would have to communicate their conspiracy through the people actually on the scene at the WTC. Not only that, but he was only on the board until fiscal year 2000.
I'm glad we can agree that there were no bombs in the building. A thermite only theory is slightly more plausible, but most of the CT's here will start calling you a government agent if you don't acknowledge the "squibs" or the "loss of momentum", and other such nonsense.
Another problem. If you believe thermite was only used in the core, that red stuff dripping out of the building is not caused by thermite then? Wouldn't the thermite have to be at the perimeter for that?
And finally. If you have no problem believing that the failure of a single floor caused by thermite could cause the collapse, why is it so hard to believe that a plane impact and the subsequent fires could cause it?
Originally posted by Vushta
You didn't address the point, but I'm used to that.
No they are not laughable.
Originally posted by Vushta
Good Grief Griff.
Welding is done as construction is being done.
How would that same process have to be altered it were to be done after the building was fully constructed and occupied. Would the process be any different?
Originally posted by Griff
But it shows that even with no loss of air, that the most pressure it could be is 2 atmospheres. That is as long as I've done the calcs correctly.
from 'david b. benson'
Ejected materials during collapse --- Here is an approximation to the horizontal ejection speeds. For simplicity, assume that all the air in the core escapes down vents, shafts and stairwells. Also assume that all the air on each floor outside the core is forced out the windows, with the visible particles entrained. The simplified model of the right side of a floor looks like
_____________________________________
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------------
in side view, with the core to the left and (all window) to the right. The descending mass is assumed to act as a perfect piston, descending flat down to the next floor. As the exterior walls formed a square but the core was a non-square rectangle, there were long sides and short sides. We consider only the long side, where the air had further to travel. The distance from the core to the exterior wall on a long side was d1 = (63.7 - 27.1)/2 m and d0 = (63.7 - 42.4)/2 m on a short side.
Now consider a trapezoid with depth d1, width 42.4 m on the interior side and width 63.7 m on the exterior side. All the air in this trapezoid is assumed to be forced out the exterior face. The area of the trapezoid is 970.815 m^2 and half the air is in a trapezoid with the same exterior side and depth 8.24 m. In other words, the 'average' particle of air lies on the 8.24 m line dividing the outer portion from the inner portion.
Let d = 8.24 m and h = 3.7 m, the height of one floor. When the perfect piston descends h/2 m, we assume that the outer half of the air mass has been forced out. Then this piston acts as a velocity multiplier by the ratio of d/(h/2),
v = (2d/h)V
where v is the speed of the 'average' particle of air along the dividing line and V is the speed of the descending piston. (For simplicity, we assume no acceleration of the descending piston.) Plugging in the numbers,
v = 4.45 V
and assuming a descending speed of V = 29 m/s, the 'average' particle of air has a speed of 129 m/s at the window! But the last particle of air, with the farthest to go, must travel d1 m in the same time,
v' = (2d1/h) = 8.89 V,
i.e., 258 m/s !
Just using the 'average', 129 m/s = 464 km/hr, which is a mighty wind indeed, 279 mph.
This simple model just produced numbers which seem to me to be too large by a factor of, say, three. Those who can look at the videos are encouraged to suggest more realistic estimates for the speed of horizontal ejection right at the edge of a descending tower.