9/11 - WTC Building 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions

Your paranoia is not universally shared.

- - - Updated - - -

All that is true.

Too bad, you don't understand them.

 

Lets pretend that 10% of them have looked into the issue. They would still outnumber the truther "experts" roughly 200 to 1.

 

"Impossible." You keep using that word.

 

Of course. Office fires can do what thermite cannot, and vice versa. They are two different things. Or didn't you know?

Actually, most of those people were killed by building collapses. Several hundred were killed by plane crashes, and certainly some number, probably in the multiple hundreds were killed by the flames. You need need to actually have the capacity to understand the interactions between those three things before you can assemble any serious comprehension of what happened that day.

This is a capacity that you regularly prove to lack.

Along with your complete cluelessness regarding physics and engineering.

 

60 years ago, the Nazis came for my family.

This time, we are ready.

 

Amen to that

 

no evidence of any conspiracy at all, it's a figment of conspiracy theorist's imaginations

 

That is why we are here. Da Twoof is a Nazi job. The people who first sounded the call to arms are known Nazis engaged in an active movement to destabilize the government in accordance to principles illustrated in The Turner Diaries. They actively recruit useful idiots like Dylan Avery and that lot to spread lies.

Some of the sheep they recruit need to be taught some basic fire science, maybe a thing or two about steel construction and they can become useful human beings. The leadership need to be stepped on like roaches.

 

Those people were murdered by pre-planned building demolition on 9/11.

My understanding of physics and engineering are backed up by scientific experiments which prove my understanding.

9/11 Experiments: The Arbitrator of Competing Hypotheses

[video=youtube;9YRUso7Nf3s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YRUso7Nf3s[/video]

 

So you absolutely stand 100% behind the physics argued in that video?

 

That demonstration is of Newton's third law of motion. Yes, I agree with it.

 

Then please explain what we are seeing in this image

 

I don't know how they did it but it looks like an exploding building to me.

 

Explain to me how this photo matches the physics explained in the video - We can clearly see the debris field moving ahead of the main collapse. In the lower left you will see a part of the facade, which at a minimum weights 2.5 tons. Why is it falling faster than the building?

 

Looks like a collapsing one to me

 

The photo does not match the physics explained in the video. That is the whole problem. NIST is trying to say that Newton's third law of motion is violated and the top portion of the building becomes a piledriver. That's impossible as demonstrated by Jonathan Cole's experiment. Something else had to happen. Explosives are suspect.

If the lower portion of the building remained structurally sound then the upper portion of the building could not destroy the lower portion without destroying itself. Something else happened. It looks like explosives destroyed the lower section and the upper section.

 

Incorrect. The video claims there was no slowing of the collapse as per the reference to Newton. However you must explain why the debris field is moving faster than the collapse. Clearly the collapse is being slowed, exactly as Newton suggests it should.

 

It looks to me like the explosions are taking slightly longer to explode the building than the freefall of the debris field.

No, clearly you do not understand Newton's third law of motion. Newton's law of motion suggests that the lower portion of the building would stop the collapse long before it reached ground zero because the top portion of the building would destroy itself as it was destroying the lower portion of the building. The top portion cannot act as a piledriver just like the top bricks could not piledrive through the lower bricks in Jonathan Cole's demonstration.

 

But this goes directly against the core claim of explosives. That they helped the building to collapse faster than it should. Now you are claiming the explosives slowed the building down?

Show me how the debris field does not show exactly the phenomena described in Cole's experiment at 6.20 of the video. For your argument to be valid the debris field should hit the lowest point of the collapse at the same time the main body of the building did. The fact the debris field was moving faster than the collapse proves the building collapsed exactly how Cole's experiment suggested it should have

 

It was by the people trapped on the upper floors of the towers and the rest of the people who died that day. 3000 innocent people were murdered on 9/11. The people responsible are still free.

 

Watch Jonathan Cole's videos. He explains it all. I have no idea what you are even asking here. Jonathan Cole did not explode the lower portion of his experiment.

 

If you support Cole's physics you must understand them. I obviously have watched the video, hence my reference to a specific experiment he carried out in the video. So please show me where I am wrong and the explanation for the body of the collapse to be out distanced by the debris field. You claim an intimate knowledge of the physics involved, it should be a easy task for you

 

You are doing so much double speak that I do not understand your question. First of all it is not "Cole's physics". Jonathan Cole is demonstrating Newton's third law of motion using scientific experiments. I do understand exactly what Cole is proving. If you don't understand it then go take a physics class. I'm not going to be able to do a better job explaining physics than Jonathan Cole.

 

Then you should be able to explain why the building did exactly what Cole's experiment did at 6.20 of the video. Pretty simple question for someone who is as self proclaimed smart as you

 

The building did not replicate the experiment. That's the whole problem. It looks like the lower section of the WTC building was explosively demolished. In order for Jonathan Cole's experiment to replicate the behavior of the towers he would have had to explosive demolish the lower section of his demonstration as the upper section approached the lower section.

Now it is your turn to answer a question. If you don't understand it then why do you want me to try and explain it rather than take a physics class?