• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Audio of the explosives which brought down WTC 7

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
kylebisme said:
Neither the Taliban nor the Northern Alliance formed until years after the Soviets backed out, and as I quoted from Wiki above, even "Osama bin Laden was among the recipients of U.S. arms", see this article for more details. Furthermore, the Taliban was hanging out with oil barons in Texas in 1997.
Click to expand...


Holy shit what the hell is wrong with you? First you suggested there wasn't evidence that Khalid al-Mihdhar wasn't a muslim. I pointed out he was in the Taliban, fought in Bosnia, was in Al-Qeada and a follower of Anwar al-Awlaki. Then you try and suggest he might be tied to the CIA because they supported the Afghan mujaheddin against the Soviets even though Khalid al-Mihdhar fought in the Afghan civil war against the CIA backed Northern Alliance.

Please feel free to address the evidence I presented in the OP by responding to the questions here.
Click to expand...

You don't have any evidence. Those stupid audio videos don't prove anything and if you think thermite was involved you're beyond help.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911..._op=view_page&PAGE_id=70&MMN_position=186:186
 
First said:
The lack of mathematical evidence for a conspiracy is well documented in the OP's original conspiracy theory thread, and the lack of any attempt other than high school algebra to show otherwise is sufficient enough proof that no one particularly informed on the events of 9/11 believes in a conspiracy to bring down the towers.
Click to expand...

So... based on your above you conclude the 9/11 event was the work of a lone 'bad guy'? How can one person fly four planes and crash each of them... ?... I opt for a Conspiracy! Not sure who's version of which conspiracy you might adopt but given there is evidence that the Official Conclusion did not examine evidence because they determined there was none to examine with out examining to see if there was or not leads me to wonder why that is so.
 
JEDIYoda said:
You know thats BS excuse!!
Just because Jimmy Swaggert was a pracher doesn`t mean he was into prostitutes......

Just because ther terrorists liked stripeprs and alcohol does not take away from the fact they were Islamic...lol
Click to expand...

A young couple on their way to their wedding met with an accident and died. They waited at the Pearly gates for their induction to heaven. Upon seeing St. Peter and wondering if they could get married in heaven they asked St. Peter that question. Months passed and finally St. Peter returned and said 'Yes, you can'. Then they asked St. Peter if they wanted to divorce could they do so in heaven. With this St. Peter stuttered and stammered and showed great contempt... Wondering if they offended St. Peter they asked him... "Did we upset you?" To which St. Peter responded... "It took me three months to find a priest in heaven now how long do you think it will take me to find an attorney?"
 
RocksteadyDotNet said:
If it was a conspiracy then why not just bomb the buildings and say it was terrorists?

Why crash planes into them?

Did they think people would have a hard time believing terrorist would bomb a building!?!!

They could have bombed the buildings and said it was Iraqi/Persian terrorists. The invasion of Iraq/Iran was their end game right?

The conspiracy doesn't make any fucking sense.
Click to expand...

Amazing... I wondered why the government staged exercises to thwart exactly that kind of terrorist attack... Terrorists using planes to fly into buildings.. WTC was one such building... what a waste of training, I guess.

Which conspiracy makes no sense?

Evidence is not proof of some fact but, rather, it is supportive of a hypothesis that includes such evidence to come to some conclusion, it seems to me.

I hear tell we did invade Iraq and it seems to me Afghanistan too... but that is another story.
 
JSt0rm01 said:
dude I wouldn't call that proof I'm sorry
Click to expand...

Evidence is not proof... but lots of evidence depicting the same thing ought to sway most 'beyond some reasonable threshold' to conclude the possibility of something.

Like the size of the Pentagon aircraft entry hole and the exit hole some three rings in... that is evidence of something. Not a 757 but something.
 
ModestGamer said:
you just gotta admit the timing was perfectly convinient. You had enron absolutely skull fucking california for billions.
Click to expand...
You could look at an event at virtually any time at all and point to some corresponding event as "convenient". Shitty things are happening all of the time.

ModestGamer said:
His approval rating was something like 30%
Click to expand...
Not true.

ModestGamer said:
we how could this have not worked any better.
Click to expand...
Yes, things are going swimmingly in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Congrats on that one.
 
LunarRay said:
Evidence is not proof... but lots of evidence depicting the same thing ought to sway most 'beyond some reasonable threshold' to conclude the possibility of something.
Click to expand...
Lots of flimsy evidence is worthless. You can stack cow pats as high as you like, at the end of the day you still have a pile of shit.
 
xj0hnx said:
Without explosives? Did you see the fireballs made by the planes? On the note of experimental confirmation, well, that's all they can do as no one exactly has a few planes and some skyscrapers to fly them into to try to replicate the scenario. Fact is they can only reproduce small pieces of what happened, and that is never going to give any real evidence of what really happened during a disaster of that magnitude.

Also, do you know what, and how long it takes to set up a demo? There's just no way that you could set up a demo in buildings that were being used daily, and no one notice. Of course if you did somehow have an invisible crew that could work at miracle speeds, they would have to be fine with knowing they were going to be killings possibly thousands of innocent Americans and still remain silent to this day.
Click to expand...


Carbon fires burn hot but not hot enough to melt steel. JP4 or 5 or what ever they use now does not burn all that hot nor does any of the other stuff in offices. I find it amazing how some folks managed to get from above the fires to below and out of the buildings in an environment so hot as to melt steel...
I also find it simply amazing that the structure below which was more massive than the bit above simply up and broke apart. Weakend steel will bend and I'd expect to see extremely long bits of core structure all bent and probably falling over if physics demanded that but not stuff proceeding through the path of greatest resistance as if it were not there...

As an aside, why did they EPA say it was ok to breathe the garbage air at 'ground zero' inspite of their original statements that it was not? Did that bit of statement not cause lots to die and to die in the future?
 
kylebisme said:
I've provided more math than any of you arguing against me apparently can, and even if I never had; this thread is about the audio evidence.
Click to expand...

No we actually provided quite a bit mathematically and presented examples of why your theories were kooky beyond words. Meanwhile you took freshman-level physics formulas like f = ma and attempted algebra-level substitutions in an attempt to "prove" (rofl) that there was enough resistive force that would make free-fall speed at gravity (9.8m/s^2) impossible. (In fact you didn't give up your mathematical "proofs" at all, someone had to pry them from your posts on another forum, forcing you to accept them as yours). You were then asked for a concrete number for the resistive force using whatever units you wanted and, of course, wimped out of providing said information. It's quite well documented here: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=329108&highlight=wtc7

And the audio evidence is nowhere near conclusive of anything other than the voices in your head, and you couldn't prove otherwise if your life depended on it (and, of course, won't attempt to here as per your MO).
 
kylebisme said:
That said, NIST even built a full 3D model of WTC 7, but they couldn't make it come anywhere close to free fall.
Click to expand...

Where do you get this idea that towers fell at free fall? We have actual video proof showing that it took quite a bit longer than free fall. Also, Rosie O'Donnell is retarded.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLShZOvxVe4


Just blow them up and blame terrorists.
Or fly a plane into them and blame terrorists.

Why do both?
Click to expand...
WTC was once attacked by a truck bomb and it didn't bring the place down. Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 and it still stood. There's not much assurance that one method will work, so several methods should be used at one time. Proper demolition techniques should not be used because that would be way too heaty; anything blamed on terrorists should be really half-assed.


you just gotta admit the timing was perfectly convinient. You had enron absolutely skull fucking california for billions.
His approval rating was something like 30%
He had no valid reason to invade Iraq.
Click to expand...
Bush never said Iraq was responsible for 9/11. All he said was that Saddam Hussein was a threat to American security and that he was trying to get nuclear weapons. Bush could have made that exact same argument and the same retarded invasion even if 9/11 never happened.


I hear tell we did invade Iraq and it seems to me Afghanistan too... but that is another story.
Click to expand...
The invasion of Afghanistan seems like more a knee jerk reaction than anything else. Even though Afghanistan is an international effort and has troops from Canada and Britain, Afghanistan has fewer troops than Iraq. If the US cares that little about Afghanistan, then I can't see them planning this in advance. Iraq you could actually make a case for since hundreds of thousands of troops are/were there, but as stated before, Bush never actually said Iraq did 9/11. He really didn't.
 
Last edited:
ModestGamer said:
to determine the reason behind a crime motive must first be established. the motive in this case was

Oil
Click to expand...

You need not provide the motive to convict a person of a crime. We do have a crime, imo, regarding Iraq's invasion by the USA. UN Charter, by treaty, is part of US law. The UN Security Counsel remained seized of the subject regarding Iraq. We invaded none-the-less... We initially claimed that under the 'Self Defense' provision and that Iraq was going to invade the US in some fashion within 45 days we had no opportunity to seek Security Counsel approval. That wouldn't fly so we opted for the more traditional and easier to defend notion that Security Counsel resolutions gave that authority to us... Why we invaded Iraq clouds the issue... we did invade... that is what needs being seen all by itself..
 
ShawnD1 said:
Where do you get this idea that towers fell at free fall? We have actual video proof showing that it took quite a bit longer than free fall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLShZOvxVe4
Click to expand...


They fell through the path of greatest resistance. Amazing stuff that. How long would you opine the collapse ought to have taken given the structure increased in mass the further down you went... I think it had four stages of varying core steel thickness. A rather massive building totally collapsed in about 15 seconds... FF would suggest, what?, 9 or 10. The pile at the bottom suggests to me that there was not enought 'stuff' to do that.. it was 'blown' away and lived all over manhatten's lower end.. and the Hudson and stuck in buildings here and there.
 
 
Last edited:
First said:
No we actually provided quite a bit mathematically and presented examples of why your theories were kooky beyond words. Meanwhile you took freshman-level physics formulas like f = ma and attempted algebra-level substitutions in an attempt to "prove" (rofl) that there was enough resistive force that would make free-fall speed at gravity (9.8m/s^2) impossible. (In fact you didn't give up your mathematical "proofs" at all, someone had to pry them from your posts on another forum, forcing you to accept them as yours). You were then asked for a concrete number for the resistive force using whatever units you wanted and, of course, wimped out of providing said information. It's quite well documented here: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=329108&highlight=wtc7

I think what is shown is that in order for the bit above to crush the bit below you need lots more time than the time it took. Remember most of the intial 15 stories of the upper bit was blown out and the initial 2gjoules of potential energy left as the upper bit started to decend.
Just looking at that event without pulling out the calculator and doing the math seems to imply there is no central core... I'd have expected to see a very tall group of central core structure standing there if the buildings fell as NIST describes. IF they are not standing upright then I'd expect to see them all bent over in some fashion.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
William Gaatjes said:
I think you will find enough information here :

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2078916&highlight=dampeners&page=74l#1842

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=29976462&highlight=dampeners#post29976462#1852

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=29976462&highlight=dampeners#post29976462#1863

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=29976462&highlight=dampeners#post29976462#1865

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=29976462&highlight=dampeners#post29976462#1867

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=29976462&highlight=dampeners#post29976462#1869
Click to expand...

I was there... In fact, I went to the Randy site and copied some of the posts made there. Mainly cuz they were mis posted on our site leaving out essential bits to make an argument against Kyle.

I find it interesting that folks seek to debunk using tangential issues that are not related to the issue at hand.
Seems to me the issue is to do with the sounds of explosions.. and not the size of stacked cow pats or their odor.
I've not heard the 'sound' recordings before but know Chandler to be quite thorough so I'll study that. After all he's the guy who 'caught' the NIST building WTC 7 2.25 second free fall error in their analysis.
 
I don't know why you guys engage in debate. If someone still believes 9/11 was an elaborate conspiracy against Muslims after all these years, there is absolutely nothing you can say or show to him to change his mind.

And, there is nothing he can say or do that will change any onlooking reader's mind.
 
xj0hnx said:
My favorite theory? You know something about me that I don't?
Click to expand...
I gather you favor the theory that the attacks were the work of a few handfuls of Arabs conspiring toegheter. If not, please share your 9/11consperacy theory.

xj0hnx said:
Computers don't create random chaos...
Click to expand...
Nor is reality random chaos. Surely you know this? Regardless, computers can and are used to study reality, Such as NIST's WTC 7 simulation which they could have easily gotten to free fall had they modeled the effects of explosives, but it's impossible to come anywhere close with only impact damage and fire. Also, you can see some examples other physics based modeling here.

xj0hnx said:
It would take a lot more than an elevator renovation.
Click to expand...
As long as you insist didn't take any explosives at all, you can't rightly argue that even a little bit of explosives planted during the elevator renovations couldn't have been used to insure the buildings came down. That said, it took a lot.

woolfe9999 said:
Assume for the sake of argument that the sound is coming from the building, can you think of another reason you'd hear noise from a building within 3 seconds before it totally collapses due to structural instability?
Click to expand...
If you can come up with a better reason for the sequence of massive booms which caused people four blocks away to snap their heads to look at the building just before it came down, please share.

ModestGamer said:
to determine the reason behind a crime motive must first be established. the motive in this case was

Oil
Click to expand...
I figure it was more about war profiteering in general, but oil likely played a part, along with the natural gas line plans through Afghanistan and the rich mineral deposits there.

Sclamoz said:
....Khalid al-Mihdhar fought in the Afghan civil war against the CIA backed Northern Alliance.
Click to expand...
Civil war in Afghanistan (1996–2001):

The Northern Alliance was supported by Russia, Turkey, Iran and India while the Taliban were supported by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates.
Click to expand...
I'm quite certain the CIA wasn't backing the same side as Russia and Iran. Also, that discussion on the iron-rich microspheres you linked is outdated by the discovery of underacted nano-thermite in the dust, and I've yet to see anyone offer a better explanation for the sequence of boobs.

ShawnD1 said:
kylebisme said:
That said, NIST even built a full 3D model of WTC 7, but they couldn't make it come anywhere close to free fall.
Click to expand...
Where do you get this idea that towers fell at free fall?
Click to expand...
The towers were WTC 1 and WTC 2, while was talking about WTC 7, which descended at free fall for over 100 feet of global collapse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top