Fox News: much more open-minded about explosive devices bringing down 7 World Trade

[LunarRay]

You'd think the truther nuts would sort of die down as time passes by, but I guess it's going to be one of those things like the moon landing where some nuts will always come up with new zany theories of what "really" happened.

And, you support the conclusion of some folks being 'Nuts' by what evidence?

You do realize that none of the, let's say, four official efforts by the 'officials' were investigations with reasonable scope, don't you?

It would be nice for there to be at least one investigation into the crimes that occurred... One of them there forensically oriented type thingi.

 

[LunarRay]

thanks for the video... I am now a believer. I believe you seriously have too much time on your hands.

And mods should lock this... just a troll thread that will devolve into a 1000+ post count about dipshits believing something that has been debunked time and time again.

kylebisme... weren't there some contrails recently that needed looking into.

Well.... seems to me there are like 18 TSA threads and about 12 Muslim Temple threads so why is it you choose silence opinion on this topic and go on to define contra opinion generators as 'Dip-shits'... Are the contra contra opinion folks 'Dip-shits' too?

 

[LunarRay]

For the love of [insert politically correct noun here], Please lock this thread!!!!

You can choose to not post and let it run its course. IF no one else posts then it will surely die?

 

[Ns1]

Well.... seems to me there are like 18 TSA threads and about 12 Muslim Temple threads so why is it you choose silence opinion on this topic and go on to define contra opinion generators as 'Dip-shits'... Are the contra contra opinion folks 'Dip-shits' too?

Other tsa threads don't have 500+ replies

 

[LunarRay]

Okay guys, we're going nut fishing again!

9/11 was not an inside job, if for no other reason, the government couldn't keep a secret of that magnitude.

A secret of what? You mean like the Gulf of Tonkin thingi?

 

[hal2kilo]

LOL, I still remember his "investigation" into Al Capone's "hidden vault," which ended up containing a few empty liquor bottles. :biggrin:

Biggest anti-climax I've ever witnessed.

 

[LunarRay]

Other tsa threads don't have 500+ replies

Perhaps, if that is true, there is not that much interest, No?

IF you have 500 or a 1000 posts there must be interest and that is the purpose of a forum, I'd think. I don't think a forum like P&N is designed to be populated by comments that support only one side of issues, do you?

 

[hal2kilo]

I wonder how long this threads going to end up being. Ramble on..

 

[LunarRay]

(...) Since the metal has already failed in a ductile fashion, the brittle failure of the remaining components occurs very suddenly as fracture occurs, rather than simple plastic deformation in the case of ductile failure. (...)

One (me) would think that any of the events going on regarding the beams and columns, floor assembly, and what ever else is all connected together to form that WTC 7 structure would be reflected in the exterior brittle bits that to my eye is not apparent.
According to some speculators with structural know-how the cascading of floor sections adjacent to column 79 initially and all the rest subsequently ought to be reflected in the exterior as the 'penthouse' failure is.
The fire induced theory seems to require quite some time to complete its total and complete interior destruction... nothing is seen that I've heard about in the exterior that is visable.

I don't have a problem with your thesis per se... I do have a problem with a fire induced complete symmetrical collapse (within reasonable parameters of that definition, of course) and there be no evidence of that visually.

NIST had to conclude that the damage sustained from the tower collapses was of no consequence because the building did not topple in the direction of that damaged area... not to anyone's view.

 

[al981]

Here is another video from the same camera, but apparently recorded with a different mic, and some videos of explosions earlier in the day here and here.

ah, nice find... corroborating audio sources for those detonations. :thumbsup:

/awaiting elfenix's "someone bumped multiple microphones at the exact same time" excuse.

 

[LunarRay]

ah, nice find... corroborating audio sources for those detonations. :thumbsup:

/awaiting elfenix's "someone bumped multiple microphones at the exact same time" excuse.

It appears that evidence exists depicting 'sounds' that occur proximate to the time of collapse... Has there been effort to determine what made the sounds? Lots of events make explosive type noise... but can it be narrowed down to this or that kind of explosive? Or, could the noise be from the concussion of stuff hitting other stuff? Perhaps that is not possible to determine given the 'poor' ummmm quality of the sounds.

 

[Ns1]

Perhaps, if that is true, there is not that much interest, No?

IF you have 500 or a 1000 posts there must be interest and that is the purpose of a forum, I'd think. I don't think a forum like P&N is designed to be populated by comments that support only one side of issues, do you?

The point is after this thread reaches critical mass (100 replies) were going to start saying the same shit from the other 500+ reply threads.

Here, since I'm at the perfect place for this (taking a shit)

ZOMG physics!
The upward puff!
Thermite!! Red chips!!
No detonators!
You don't know shut about physics!
Lol youtube proof
Newton!!!
how'd they do it it's UNPOSSIBLE
LOOK AT THESE LOW QUALITY SOUND BITS
no wai, fire can't do that!
YES IT CAN



That should cover the first 20 pages or so. Bbl, wiping my ass need both hands.

 

[ElFenix]

ah, nice find... corroborating audio sources for those detonations. :thumbsup:

/awaiting elfenix's "someone bumped multiple microphones at the exact same time" excuse.

corroborating source? one of the videos is recorded immediately after the first 2 towers fell, and doesn't corroborate anything at all with the WTC7. the other video has no indication of where or when it was shot. they don't corroborate anything with regard to WTC7.

the video that starts with a countdown is great evidence that there wasn't an explosion. the two guys you hear on the video are having a normal conversation until the building exterior starts collapsing. if the sound at the beginning (before the exterior of the building collapsed, and easily picked up by the mic) were an explosion they'd have reacted to it. they didn't.

It appears that evidence exists depicting 'sounds' that occur proximate to the time of collapse... Has there been effort to determine what made the sounds? Lots of events make explosive type noise... but can it be narrowed down to this or that kind of explosive? Or, could the noise be from the concussion of stuff hitting other stuff? Perhaps that is not possible to determine given the 'poor' ummmm quality of the sounds.

i made an effort to determine the sound and it's a guy saying 'second movie.'

 

[al981]

corroborating source? one of the videos is recorded immediately after the first 2 towers fell, and doesn't corroborate anything at all with the WTC7. the other video has no indication of where or when it was shot. they don't corroborate anything with regard to WTC7.

the video that starts with a countdown is great evidence that there wasn't an explosion. the two guys you hear on the video are having a normal conversation until the building exterior starts collapsing. if the sound at the beginning (before the exterior of the building collapsed, and easily picked up by the mic) were an explosion they'd have reacted to it. they didn't.

since you missed it, corroborating does not refer to the latter 2.

"corroborating" audio sources refers to this audio from kyle's post, and another that was posted before from a reporter's mic nearby, two deep thunders.

two different mics, picking up the same explosions before the penthouse officially comes down. corroborating. lol at your "reaction" excuse. your "someone bumped the microphone" was better, but it doesn't when there's corroboration, eh?

 

[al981]

It appears that evidence exists depicting 'sounds' that occur proximate to the time of collapse... Has there been effort to determine what made the sounds? Lots of events make explosive type noise... but can it be narrowed down to this or that kind of explosive? Or, could the noise be from the concussion of stuff hitting other stuff? Perhaps that is not possible to determine given the 'poor' ummmm quality of the sounds.

evidence indeed effort made to determine what made the sounds? as far as NIST effort? No. dismissed, end of story!

the quality was not poor. heard the explosions loud and clear with cheap $3 magnavox work earphones :thumbsup:

 

[ElFenix]

since you missed it, corroborating does not refer to the latter 2.

"corroborating" audio sources refers to this audio from kyle's post, and another that was posted before from a reporter's mic nearby, two deep thunders.

two different mics, picking up the same explosions before the penthouse officially comes down. corroborating. lol at your "reaction" excuse. your "someone bumped the microphone" was better, but it doesn't when there's corroboration, eh?

that's one camera with one microphone. there is no other reporter. the original video is the one with the countdown.

again, if there was a sound the two guys talking, that you can hear if you turn it up, would have reacted to the sound. they didn't.

there is no corroboration.


i don't recall ever claiming someone bumped the mic.

 

[LunarRay]

The point is after this thread reaches critical mass (100 replies) were going to start saying the same shit from the other 500+ reply threads.

Here, since I'm at the perfect place for this (taking a shit)

ZOMG physics!
The upward puff!
Thermite!! Red chips!!
No detonators!
You don't know shut about physics!
Lol youtube proof
Newton!!!
how'd they do it it's UNPOSSIBLE
LOOK AT THESE LOW QUALITY SOUND BITS
no wai, fire can't do that!
YES IT CAN



That should cover the first 20 pages or so. Bbl, wiping my ass need both hands.

My point is actually a few points..
Interest on either side of the issue ought to be backed up by evidence or what purports to be evidence and not back up opinion of the events based on bias toward the folks on the other side.

I view the sick and dead resulting from EPA cautionary statements being transformed into reassurances that the air was fine to breathe as crimes. Congress has before it a few billion $ bill to help the 'responders'... NYC recently ok'd about 700 million for them...

We spent 50 million on Clinton's issues with Monica via a proper investigation but apparently don't view 9/11 as a crime... Someone should be indicted based on some kind of evidence of their complicity. Bush called it a war and determined it was Bin Laden et. al. etc.. Does he have evidence he'd care to share?
Regardless of a crime or an act of war or both it seems to me we should investigate the events so to justify actions taken in the name of those events and not go willy nilly into sovereign nations based on the event occurring alone... We are suppose to be a nation of laws... millions have died so far, or at least lots have and I've yet to see anything to justify that. (notwithstanding the video and translations of Bin Laden that does not follow the actual utterances)

 

[al981]

that's one camera with one microphone. there is no other reporter. the original video is the one with the countdown.

again, if there was a sound the two guys talking, that you can hear if you turn it up, would have reacted to the sound. they didn't.

there is no corroboration.


i don't recall ever claiming someone bumped the mic.

ah yes, the news station switched to other footage. same camera, apparently different sounding mics. in both, the explosions are clear as day, unless one is using shitty speakers.

a lack of reaction doesn't deny the basic fact the explosions were caught on audio. as seen before, the crowd reacted "this is it" before any official collapse started, and they too heard the explosions

edit: someone used the "bumped the microphone" bullshit repeatedly. also "wind", LoL! if it wasn't you, i apologize. but the crowd in the "this is it" link didn't react to wind they reacted to several explosions, which were pointed out clearly. "That is the building that is gonna go down next"

 

[LunarRay]

i made an effort to determine the sound and it's a guy saying 'second movie.'

That really could be true, I think. I can't quite make that out but it does have some bits that sound like an utterance of some sort.... Somewhere there must be the capability to refine that or those sounds...

 

[LunarRay]

evidence indeed effort made to determine what made the sounds? as far as NIST effort? No. dismissed, end of story!

the quality was not poor. heard the explosions loud and clear with cheap $3 magnavox work earphones :thumbsup:

I have a hard time trying to listen to something without having a predetermined idea of what I want to hear... Not that you can't but I want to hear explosions and can.. but can hear other stuff too... just not sure what I can hear or what is real... One can be open minded to a point, I guess.

 

[Ns1]

a lack of reaction doesn't deny the basic fact the explosions were caught on audio. as seen before, the crowd reacted "this is it" before any official collapse started, and they too heard the explosions

explosives but no detonators = gtfo
explosives but no evidence of massive explosives = gtfo
no way to get explosives into building w/o notice = gtfo
no way to perform massive government coverup without it getting onto wikileaks = gtfo

based on these 4 facts, can anyone really believe that wtc7 was brought down by explosives?

 

[JEDIYoda]

The back of building can't be seen in that video, and unfortunatly not in any other video of the collapse either. What you are refering to is the penthouses in the center of the buiilding, as can be seen in these pictures.


The model does mimic the penthouse collapses fairly well, but it stops shortly after the rest of the structure starts to come down, and doesn't show anything close to what would continue to come down like WTC 7 did.


Rather, they both begin "flexing like a sheet of paper" just before they fall, as I've illustrated here:

That's how controlled demolitions are often done so that the buildings fall in on themselves. On the other hand, fires can't come anywhere close to making a building come down like that, one previously damaged by impacting rubble or otherwise. Hence the reason our government can only show the model they built with our tax dollars start to come down like WTC 7 did, and it's also why what little they do show of the model crumples like cloth rather than flexing like a sheet of paper as WTC 7 and the other demolition example does.


Here is another video from the same camera, but apparently recorded with a different mic, and some videos of explosions earlier in the day here and here.

hahahhaaaa...anything about the WTC and Kylebisme is all over it like a fly on shit...rofl....

 

[werepossum]

You need to take a course in finite element analysis if you want to pursue this further. The reason the model stops is because the simulation is over, not because the model predicts the collapse will stop. Once the constitutive elements of a structure are separated or undergo fracture, it's computationally impossible to simulate the remainder of the collapse. I'm actually impressed with how much the model captures - hardly a trivial accomplishment, given the complexity of the problem. If anything, your video shows me that the official story is more believable than I might have previously suspected. One key thing you need to realize is that once the building undergoes brittle failure, it will freefall regardless of the cause of the failure.

Very good points which are doomed to be totally ignored. I cannot even imagine creating an FEA model which models such a complex structure in such chaotic conditions in any meaningful level of complexity and confidence. Unfortunately an actual FEA analysis which probably take literally millions of man-hours, not to mention a freakin' super computer to run the analysis with that magnitude of elements, has no more impact than a lawyer's model taking a few hours. People just assume that if they see a model, it represents reality.

not on wikileaks = it never happened

+1

 

[DominionSeraph]

The back of building can't be seen in that video, and unfortunatly not in any other video of the collapse either. What you are refering to is the penthouses in the center of the buiilding, as can be seen in these pictures.

In back of the front face would be the back side of the building.

I hope we don't need to get Grover in here to teach, "Near.... Far."

The model does mimic the penthouse collapses fairly well, but it stops shortly after the rest of the structure starts to come down, and doesn't show anything close to what would continue to come down like WTC 7 did.

Why would it need to model the dropping of the front face? It's failure analysis, not a generic gravity simulation. The modeled failure point is clear; after that gravity takes over. For gravity to do what it does on an insufficiently supported structure does not take the direction of a government agency. There is no Department of Gravitational Compliance which sees to it that structures with critically weakened bases don't ignore the laws of physics and decide to keep standing.
If there's no support, things fall. The front face of WTC 7 fell. You cannot correlated these two facts?

Rather, they both begin "flexing like a sheet of paper" just before they fall, as I've illustrated here:

Both? The two are nothing alike. One is an unsupported sail of steel flexing, the other is concrete breaking.

 

[Greenman]

Hairdo Riviera is on Fox?