9/11 Truth for Dummies: Why Near-Free Fall Speed Was Impossible Without Explosives

Discussion in '9/11' started by Munkle, Mar 29, 2014.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, your assumption that "total collapse was inevitable...."
    is total incredulity!

    So the elevator shafts an stairs would not fill up, because all
    of the rubble would simply fall outside of these spaces?
    how do you figure that? stuff was going down, gravity pulls
    stuff down, and there were these open bits in the form of
    elevator shafts & stair wells, so how is it that these spaces
    were not filled with rubble?
     
  2. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    When the steel heated and weakened it could no longer support the normal load. Same as the model.
    You are avoiding questions.
     
  3. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's a logical progression,NOT incredulity

    And they wouldn't fill up because most of the rubble was larger that the openings,and the rest was trying to be jammed into them all at once

    The collapse was progressing faster than they could be filled
     
  4. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    so all that fine powder that was ejected from the sides, just had to fly, rather than drop straight down. ....

    also the incredulity factor is still there, logical progression or what,
    the problem here is that there are a multitude of potential out comes
    for this sort of bit, and most of them, do not include total destruction
    of the tower(s).

    The total destruction, + the sort time it took for that total destruction, points squarely at some form of engineered event, somebody planned for the towers to be destroyed and the destruction observed is the product of that planning.
     
  5. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All that 'fine powder' within the structure of the towers was suspended by air currents till it reached a point outside the perimiter wall and started falling...no incredulity needed on my part
     
  6. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So in cases where it suits your fancy, gravity pulls straight down
    and in other cases, its air currents that carry pulverized material
    out of the building leaving behind nothing to fall down elevator shafts
    etc.....

    the cosmic improbability generator is working overtime.
     
  7. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No incredulity yet,updrafts,especially from fires are well documented,plus the increase in air pressure from the collapsing building aided the suspension..
     
  8. 9/11 was an inside job

    9/11 was an inside job Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,508
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    some people are too arrogant to admit they have been taken to school.you indeed have taken the OCTA'S to school here and educated them.
     
  9. 9/11 was an inside job

    9/11 was an inside job Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,508
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    :thumbsdown:

    you need to bone up on junior high school physics because even all of them know know this post of yours is b.s.there have been many physic enginners not on the payroll of the government who have come out and spoken the truth that any junior high school kid can figure how the laws of physics were violated that day.that the buildings should have GRADUALLY come down over a long period of time and tipped over instead of coming straight down.miserable fail!!!!!!!!:roflol:

    show us a building where the ENTIRE structure collapsed falling STRAIGHT DOWN within 11 seconds.til then that you provide evidence of that,your just talking crap.:roll::roflol:

    anytime we challenge you to show one,you all cowardly run away and never do,just coming back with coming back with DEB wunker links or childish posts like this one as your evidence with nothing whatsoever to back up your ramblings.
     
  10. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Non sequitur,since no building did that on 9/11
     
  11. AlphaOmega

    AlphaOmega Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    28,747
    Likes Received:
    4,821
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gee that's funny considering Im a highly paid research scientist. I have worked in the sciences for 30 years. I also coexist as a software programmer. I am sought after because I understand the Science behind the software that Scientists need. Science aside, common sense should dictate to you that the size and scale of the plan required to pull off an inside job to bring down the WTC is impossible to have occurred without detection. Impossible.
    Tell Jesse the body we said hi. I miss that crazy wrestler on Saturday mornings!
     
  12. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    See the new thread, I'm about to add here.
     
  13. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No,the misrepresentation of truthers...
     
  14. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then WHAT R U doing on this forum?

    Please note that it is OBVIOUS to even the most casual observer
    that the "collapse" of WTC1, 2 & 7 had to have been engineered events designed to happen exactly as they did. Features such as but not limited to: total destruction of the buildings, speed of destruction, and in the case of the towers, pulverization & ejection of tons of material from the tower(s).
     
  15. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    No just the opposite is true to me, I believe the casual observers think the truthers have no proof that there was engineered events. I base that not on the posts here by either side postings but by the links provided to information that explains. Sorry Bob I think you have it wrong....you know as a casual observer.

    On a positive note you and the other truthers (that seems a strange name for your group) have given me the opportunity to learn more about the events of 911. What I have read of the NIST report is very informative. Do truthers have something like that from engineers and scientists I could read?
     
  16. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do tell, have you seen AE911TRUTH.org ?
    or for that matter, 911speakout.org
    Check out the physics demos from David Chandler & Johnathan Cole
    also, http://torontohearings.org/
     
  17. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Will do
     
  18. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Question: have you looked? and if so ..... what do you think?
     
  19. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    not yet.....other things demand my attention.
     
  20. Don Townsend

    Don Townsend New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Destruction of the World Trade Center:
    Why the Official Account Cannot Be True
    David Ray Griffin


    Jones, Steven E., 2006. "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" In Griffin and Scott, eds., 2006.

    Heller, David, 2005. "Taking a Closer Look: Hard Science and the Collapse of the World Trade Center," Garlic and Grass, Issue 6, November 24 (http://www.garlicandgrass.org/issue6/Dave_Heller.cfm).

    Hoffman, Jim, 2003. “The North Tower's Dust Cloud: Analysis of Energy Requirements for the Expansion of the Dust Cloud Following the Collapse of 1 World Trade Center,” Version 3, 9-11 Research.wtc7.net, October 16 (http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dustvolume/volume.html).

    _____, 2004. “Your Eyes Don’t Lie: Common Sense, Physics, and the World Trade Center Collapses,” 9-11 Research.wtc7.net (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/radio/youreyesdontlie/index.html).

    _____, 2005. “Building a Better Mirage: NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up of the Crime of the Century,” 911 Research, August 21 (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html).

    Hufschmid, Eric, 2002. Painful Questions: An Analysis of the September 11thAttack. Goleta, CA: Endpoint Software.

    Killough-Miller, Joan, 2002. “The ‘Deep Mystery’ of Melted Steel,” WPI Transformations, Spring (http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html).
    King, Jeff, 2003. “The WTC Collapse: What the Videos Show,” Indymedia Webcast News, November 12 (http://ontario.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=7342&group=webcast).
    Lavello, Randy, n.d. “Bombs in the Building,” Prison Planet.com (http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html).

    Meyer, Peter, n.d. “Did the Twin Towers Collapse on Demand?”, Section 3 of “The World Trade Center Demolition and the so-Called War on Terrorism,” Serendipity (www.serendipity.li/wtc.html).
    _____, 2005b. “WTC Basement Blast and Injured Burn Victim Blows 'Official 9/11 Story' Sky High,” Arctic Beacon, June 24 (http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/28031.htm).
    Griffin, David Ray, 2004. The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about 9/11 and the Bush Administration. Northampton, MA: Olive Branch (Interlink).
    Glanz, James. 2001. “Engineers Are Baffled over the Collapse of 7 WTC; Steel Members Have Been Partly Evaporated,” New York Times, November 29.
    Bollyn, Christopher, 2001. “Some Survivors Say ‘Bombs Exploded Inside WTC,’” American Free Press, October 22 (http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_22_01/ Some_Survivors_Say__Bombs_Expl/some_survivors_say__bombs_expl.html).

    Baker, Jeremy, n.d. “PBS Documentary: Silverstein, FDNY Razed WTC 7,” Infowars.com (http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm).
     
  21. Alucard

    Alucard New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    7,828
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Definitely something to ponder.
     

Share This Page