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.
Thus, the 31.0 sec point on the LDEO graph of the collapse sequence of WTC-7 can be compared to the real-time moment when we all saw WTC-7 starting to totally collapse on tv at 5:20:54 p.m. on September 11, 2001.
To confirm to yourself that there actually is a seismic signal-arrival delay time of 17 seconds in ALL 5 LDEO seismic graphs implemented, you just have to look at the two first ones, the plane impacts, to see that the moment of the first plane's impact is at 16.95 seconds, and the second plane's impact is at 16.35 seconds after the zero starting point on the graphs.
Popular Mechanics served us this image link from the LDEO site :
media.popularmechanics.com...
where you can confirm these R =Rayleigh seismic-signal arrival times yourself. (Image already posted in my answer to bsbray11 earlier in this thread).
The S? 12.8 sec signal arrival on this chart for both WTC-tower collapses is their assumption of the first S-wave (Love-waves) arrival at Pallisades seismic station. An S-wave travels somewhat faster than an R-wave in the upper earth crust.
I am still confused why LDEO did not include their WTC-7 collapse graph in this overall graph of their 9/11 seismic events, since they went to great length to allign the zero starting points of the 4 events they showed, and even compensated the nm/sec data of all 4 events to arrive at a comparable size of all 4 graphs (they did not use in that Popular Mechanics image their 0-10 and 0-100 nm/sec usual scales like in their other pages), which in fact obscured the fact that the Tower collapses were of a 10 times greater magnitude. They must have known these graphs were gone to be viewed by an overwhelmingly non-scientificly schooled audience, but they still opted to adhere to a difficult to interprete and/or compare attitude. The fact that they did not indicate clearly the signal delay time of 17 sec was also not helpfull. You had to read another pdf file of dr. Kim to find a short mentioning of this fact.
When it became clear to me that the first sign of internal collapse aligned on their graph with a moment, 4 or 5 seconds AFTER those first huge spikes on their graph, I have taken one month time to check and re-check all other possibilities, but could not find a plausible explanation for those huge spikes, long before even the penthouse roof of WTC-7 dented a bit.
And the most damning evidence for the NIST draft report conclusion is the fact that the energy involved in the first plane's WTC tower impact graph, (which btw was straight bulls-eye at the centre collumns of that tower, sending a huge vibration into the bedrock) and the energy involved in those huge spikes in the WTC-7 graph BEFORE visual signs of collapse, are clearly nearly identical, WHEN plotted at the same scale of 0-10 nm/sec.
And the actual collapse spikes are much smaller than those first pre-collapse spikes, while in fact the whole building mass roared to the ground, instead of a few columns giving way.
The only difference is the height of the WTC tower and WTC-7.
Just perform a little test yourself. Take a 30 cm metal rod or ruler, press it at 5 cm of it's top firmly with your thumb against a flat side of a table, snap one's other hand index finger against the top. Repeat that same force used for the finger snap for 15 cm of the same rod. Note which event caused the strongest vibration in the table and which event had the longest duration.
It's the 15 cm rod.
That means that the earliest huge spikes in the WTC-7 graph were caused by an event even more energy-rich than the impact of the first plane, to be able to cause a nearly identical spike length in the seismic graph with the same 0-10 nm/sec scale. And 5 seconds later the penthouse roof dented a bit (23s graph position), and another 8 seconds later -13 seconds total- (31s graph position) the obvious collapse started, which lasted about 8 - 9 seconds, the visual collapse ending at a total of 21 seconds after those first huge spikes at the 18-19 s point on the LDEO WTC-7 graph. That visual collapse end is the 40s graph position.
Equality of seismic graphs observation.
Don't let yourself get fooled by these two LDEO Palissade's 10 times smaller plotted (0-100 nm/s), seismic graphs of the WTC 2 (south tower), first collapse; and the WTC 1 (north tower), second collapse.
Do yourself a favour, and blow these 2 seismic graphs up 10 times, to the same sensibility as the WTC 7 collapse graph.
Do not pay attention yet to the actual immens collapse peaks, which will run off the paper, but look at the ones in front of them.
If you compare these 2 new (0-10 nm/s) enlarged ones to the WTC 7 graph, to your surprise, you will find the same huge spikes suddenly pre-run the actual visual collapse points, same as in the WTC 7 graph.
Interesting, how some people really used every trick in the book to give the average Joe the impression that all was well with these seismic graphs.
What's much more interesting, is the fact that these pre-collapse, suddenly appearing huge spikes are of the same magnitude as the huge precollapse spikes in the WTC 7 seismic graph.
That means that the originating event was for all 3 collapses the SAME kind of event.
However, if we saw here the effect of bearing columns snap, we should expect that the resulting vibrational force on the bedrock would be MUCH bigger for the 110 stories high collumns of WTC 1 and 2 snapping, than for the 44 stories high collumns in the WTC 7 building snapping.
Perhaps as big as 3 times more.
However, the effects on the bedrock are nearly identical.......
Tell me, how to explain that observation.
Originally posted by LaBTop on 25/11/05 at 23:20
If you convert the 2 seismic charts of WTC 1 and 2 to the same sensitivity of 0-10 nm/s, instead of the offered by LDEO sensitivity of 10-100 nm/s, you will see that suddenly these 2 charts have collapse-preceeding peaks exactly as high as in the WTC 7 chart. And all three of them are identical, meaning they used the same type and power of charges for the first hard blow to all three structures.
Do not get detoriated by the wicked way they presented those graphs, the 23 second point in that WTC 7 chart is the actual, REAL time event in New York when the roof of the penthouse dented, the first visual sign of collapse there.
It took 17 seconds for the accompanying seismic signal to reach the LDEO station. (and they threw in another trick, their chart starting point is 7 seconds off ! They really tried everything to mud the picture)
And what do you see?
There is a huge set of magnitude-peaks in front of that 23 seconds signal, and it is even 1/3 bigger as the actual collapse signals after the 23 seconds point on that WTC 7 chart.
And those peaks are also suddenly showing up on those 2 other charts from WTC 1 and 2, preceeding the actual collapse signals.
All you have to do is blow up those 2 charts with a factor 10. (Then they are converted to the same 0-10 nm/s sensitivity as the chart from WTC 7)
You have voted LaBTop for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.
www.thetech.org... (Source).
A seismogram is a record of the ground shaking recorded by a seismograph.
The P waves travel fastest through the Earth so they arrive at a seismograph first, followed by the S waves and lastly by the surface waves.
Originally posted by LabTop
And the most damning evidence for the NIST draft report conclusion is the fact that the energy involved in the first plane's WTC tower impact graph, (which btw was straight bulls-eye at the centre collumns of that tower, sending a huge vibration into the bedrock) and the energy involved in those huge spikes in the WTC-7 graph BEFORE visual signs of collapse, are clearly nearly identical, WHEN plotted at the same scale of 0-10 nm/sec.
[...]
Just perform a little test yourself. Take a 30 cm metal rod or ruler, press it at 5 cm of it's top firmly with your thumb against a flat side of a table, snap one's other hand index finger against the top. Repeat that same force used for the finger snap for 15 cm of the same rod. Note which event caused the strongest vibration in the table and which event had the longest duration. It's the 15 cm rod.
That means that the earliest huge spikes in the WTC-7 graph were caused by an event even more energy-rich than the impact of the first plane, to be able to cause a nearly identical spike length in the seismic graph with the same 0-10 nm/sec scale.
If you compare these 2 new (0-10 nm/s) enlarged and more sensitive ones to the same sensitive WTC 7 graph, to your surprise, you will find the same huge spikes suddenly pre-run the actual visual collapse points, same as in the WTC 7 graph.
Interesting, how some people really used every trick in the book to give the average Joe the impression that all was well with these seismic graphs.
What's much more interesting, is the fact that these 2 WTC 1 and 2 pre-collapse, suddenly appearing, huge spikes, are of the same magnitude and amplitude as the huge precollapse spikes in the WTC 7 seismic graph.
That means that the originating event was for all 3 collapses the SAME kind of event.
However, if we saw here the effect of bearing columns snap, we should expect that the resulting vibrational force on the bedrock would be MUCH bigger for the 110 stories high collumns of WTC 1 and 2 snapping, than for the 44 stories high collumns in the WTC 7 building snapping.
Perhaps as big as 3 times more.
However, the effects on the bedrock are nearly identical.......
Tell me, how to explain that observation.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Originally posted by LeftBehind
And since there is no credible evidence, nor is there a "smoking gun" so to speak, none of the demolition theories would stand up in court.
Theres more than two of us mate.
cheers
[edit on 20-10-2006 by LeftBehind]
My full deconstruction of this steaming pile of NIST dool is forthcoming.
I love how the gov't story lovers always make it OK that the gov't has presented us with crap research, crap hypothesis and crap data.
There will be no "smoking gun". The same precious groups story that you all cling to are the same people that destroyed the evidence, seald the area and obstructed investigations.
All that leaves for us is to show how very silly, unscientific, flawed and occasionally TOTALLY BASELESS the goverments "reports" are".
If what they spew satisfies you, than good... It does not satisify many, many collegians, engineers, physicists, theologians or ordinary blokes. Why? Big post to follow with answer. I need some eggs and toast first.
[edit on 21-10-2006 by Slap Nuts]
Check out the NIST time sequence of the collapse. on page 26. the collapse started 8 seconds before the global collapse that everyone likes to look at.
HowardRoark,
thank you for that link. That was the info I needed, so I could compare videos, NIST table and LDEO graphs.
Have a look at the righthand picture on the last page 42 of your NIST report WTC-7 link, which depicts the first exterior sign of structural failure in WTC 7, the start of the sinking of the east penthouse roof structure into the building.
You clearly see the kink in the east penthouse roof.
The timestamp indicates it occured at 5:20:46 p.m. An even better picture is on page 24, but without timestamp.
Then have another look at the LDEO graph from the seismic event of the WTC-7 collaps in my post above.
Their graph start time is 21:20:40, which is local New York city time 5:20:40 p.m.
And exactly 6 seconds later, 5:20:46 p.m. you observe the first major anomalous seismic peak.
So now we have a definite common for the LDEO WTC-7 seismic event graph and the NIST Part IIC-WTC 7 Collaps Draft report.
Now, we can compare scientificly observed data on page 26 of the NIST report with the scientific seismic data of the LDEO graph
The NIST timestamp of 17:20:46 was printed inside the picture made by some italian named photographer, who made that picture of the dent, NIST used it on one of its last pages of the draft report about WTC 7.
The ruler :
You must clamp it in a vertical position (to the side of the table) and not in a horizontal one.
It must resemble a steel skyscraper embedded in bedrock for at least 5 % of its total height.
And I tried to explain the tuning-fork vibrations effect of two 110 stories and one 44 stories high buildings on their underlaying bedrock, when hit by explosions at their bases, and the same effect when hit by 2 planes at or near the top.
Seemed not to have been clear enough, my bad.
5.5.4 Sequence of WTC 7 Collapse
Approximately 7 hours after fires initiated in WTC 7, the building collapsed. The start of a timed collapse sequence was based on 17:20:33, the time registered by seismic recordings described in Table 1.1 (in Chapter 1). The time difference between each of the figures was approximated from time given on the videotape. Figures 5-20 to 5-25 illustrate the observed sequence of events related to the collapse.
~5:20:33 p.m. WTC 7 begins to collapse. Note the two mechanical penthouses at the roof on the east and west sides in Figure 5-20.
~5:21:03 p.m. Approximately 30 seconds later, Figure 5-21 shows the east mechanical penthouse disappearing into the building. It takes a few seconds for the east penthouse to "disappear" completely.
~5:21:08 p.m. Approximately 5 seconds later, the west mechanical penthouse disappears (Figure 5-22) or sinks into WTC 7.
~5:21:09 p.m. Approximately 1 or 2 seconds after the west penthouse sinks into WTC 7, the whole building starts to collapse. A north-south "kink" or fault line develops along the eastern side as the building begins to come down at what appears to be the location of the collapse initiation (see Figures 5-23 and 5-24).
~5:21:10 p.m. WTC 7 collapses completely after burning for approximately 7 hours (Figure 5-25). The collapse appeared to initiate at the lower floors, allowing the upper portion of the structure to fall.
The Richter magnitude is related to the maximum amplitude of the S wave measured from the seismogram. Because there is a great range in the sizes of different earthquakes, the Richter scale uses logarithms. Thus, a magnitude 7 (M 7) earthquake is 10 times as large as a magnitude 6 earthquake, and releases over 30 times more energy.
Today's high-technology, digital seismographs record ground shaking over a large band of frequencies and seismic amplitudes. Today's seismometers are called broadband because they are able to sense ground motion over a wide range of frequencies, from thousands of seconds to less than a hundredth of a second.
The amplitude of the signals recorded by old seismometers was limited by the amount of movement possible between the mass, or pendulum, and the seismometer housing. Today's seismometers operate by measuring the amount of electrical energy needed to keep the mass centered in the housing in the presence of strong ground shaking. Modern seismometers can record a wide range of seismic signals, both very small and very large.