an observation about the destruction of WTC 1, 2 & 7

an average of points that had multiple inputs as to things that could affect the timing of said data point, camera vibration is but one of these factors and is significant.

The distribution of data points for any such data collection exercise, is NEVER perfect. Because of the inertia factor, + the fact that things do NOT accelerate over g unless there is some source of energy to force the falling mass to accelerate faster than g. The North & West walls of WTC7 accelerated at g for 2.25 sec.

The dissenting voice here is motivated by someone known only as "FEMR2" and has yet to publish a coherent paper on the subject to outline the source material and methods used to arrive at this conclusion.
who is "FEMR2"?

We know who Dr. Sunder, & David Chandler are because they publish under their own names.

 

Right. That's why it's an AVERAGE. You keep using your self-proclaimed "never perfect" data points to claim it was a constant free fall acceleration. You are complexly wrong by your own admission.

Nope. It AVERAGED acceleration at g.

 

How do you expect several thousand tons of material to shift from acceleration at g, to greater than g and then less than g in fractions of a second? NOT HAPPENING, the anomalies are in the data, not the motion.

 

Prove it. Show your evidence that counters the INFORMATION in the data.

 

Newton's first law, so we have the entire North & West walls of WTC7 moving and then allegedly shifting to over g and then under g acceleration, because of exactly what influence?

 

The pull of the internal elements. Read the reports.

 

AH, now I see, adding weight makes it go faster........
NOT!

 

No, but leverage would. Read the reports.

 

So you consider ONE data point, followed in a video, an accurate representation of how thousands of tons of material acted as it descended?

 

What observation of radical deformation is there?
the point that was used, moved with all of the rest of the North & West walls as they descended.

also on the subject of the leverage to cause over g acceleration.
if you specifically set-up a bench-top demo that shows how a
lever can be forced to have an end of the lever fall at over g,
that is one thing, to then expect that special conditions would
just happen in the case of WTC7, indeed with the length, strength
and placement of said lever in just the exactly correct manner to
create this phenomenon, and have sufficient weight fall on the lever
in the exact manner that would be required to achieve the result.....
right .....

 

So you have another graph with multiple data points to prove your statement?

 

What part of seeing the wall not deform as it fell, do you not understand?

 

What was the kink then?

- - - Updated - - -

Why was there a brief period of non-freefall right before the freefall stage? How could that have happened if all the support was cut at the same time?

 

Ask your friendly local experts in controlled demolition.
I'm sure they have all sorts of answers for you.............

 

What's the matter genericBob? Running out of answers to questions that promote your controlled demolition garbage?

 

You seem to be in favor of expert opinions on the subject
so have one here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAFnevcB5-Q

and as for the "controlled demolition garbage" your attitude is showing.

 

After studying the event. Jowenko recanted his initial theory. You seem to have left that part out.

 

Reference to recanted testimony please .......

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3wwdI0XawI

 

Referenced video is about WTC1 & 2
NOT WTC7 .... the testimony stands unless stated otherwise
and since he is no longer with us, that isn't likely.

 

So do you support his views on WTC 1 & 2? Or was he only right 33% of the time? (And yes - he did change his mind about WTC7)

 

So like Barry Jennings and others, he just up&dies and under most suspicious circumstances. and without a clear reference to the
recant about WTC7 its kind of a moot point. the facts are there
for all to see, WTC7 was a classic controlled demolition.

 

Most suspicious? So, since he disagreed with the truthers, they killed him? That's quite a claim, got any evidence to back it up?

 

An overweight black man over 40 dies suddenly,and that's 'suspicious'?

 

Please see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0uHFqnJ8bQ

This is but one of many reports on the subject.
WAKE UP!