John P. wrote: > "Schoenfeld" wrote in a message > > >> http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv > >> In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera > >> operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. It > >> is > >> still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the > >> collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of > >> 14-15 > >> seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5 > >> seconds? > > > Even the 9/11 Omission Report claims a figure of 10 seconds. You are > > operating under some notion that +/- 2 seconds from vacuum freefall > > saves the official account. > > That's an excellent observation. ... but wrong. I am unconcerned with the > 9/11 commission report. I am looking at a video in which the tower has not > yet completely collapsed at the 12 second mark. I suggest that one would > have a very hard time believing that this tower somehow fell in 9.5 seconds, > while seeing a portion of it still standing, and the collapse continuing, at > the 12 seconds.
You're right, the the north tower did not collapse in the 6 seconds 'conspiracy theorists' claim WTC 7 collapsed in.. I never thought of it in that way, thanks for clarifying that up, Goldstein...
> > Freefall includes some wind resistance, which is what is > > always observed in controlled demolitions. Roughly, > > the resistance for the towers should've been perhaps a second or two, > > maybe half a second for WTC 7. On the other hand, in order to save your > > official theory, the resistance from all that concrete and steal beams > > had to be the same as air. > > Did it? I'd appreciate any links or references you could provide that would > help me to understand this. Of the information I have read from engineers to > date, the buildings did not fall at freefall speed and there was nothing > suspicious about the speed or manner in which they collapse.
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7. You are demonstrably a liar.
> Much of the information I have read from engineers on this topic, points out > rather quickly that the WTC towers *were* mostly air. > > You should note that large pieces of wreckage,which *would* be falling at > freefall speed, fall faster than the building is collapsing. (they get ahead > of the collapse). Obviously, if the building were falling at freefall speed, > this would not be observed. > > >> http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=911NewsReport.flv > >> In this video, you can see the initiation of the WTC 7 collapse - the > >> mechanical penthouse on the left, collapsing through the roof. For 6 > >> seconds, you cannot see what is happening, then you can see the reminder > >> of > >> the collapse. You get a total collapse time of right at 13 seconds. How > >> would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 6.5 seconds? > > > There is no 'remainder of the collapse'. It takes 6 seconds for the > > towers to collapse from start to finish - the video clearly shows that. > > You must be confusing the smoke as some sort of indicator that it 'is > > still collapsing'. > > Nope. If there was no remainder of the collapse, the building would still be > standing. The collapse initiates with the mechanical penthouse falling into > the building (indicating a failure of the structure below the mechanical > penthouse). > > Here's how you can see this for yourself. Watch the video again. The image > of WTC 7 comes in around 57 seconds - "Now here we're going to show you..." > > Look at the top left of the building - on the roof. The mechanical penthouse > is still there. > > At 1:02, you see the mechanical penthouse collapse into the building - "Now > we go to video tape..." > > You have just witnessed the initiation of the collapse at time 1:02. > > From about 1:05 until 1:10, you cannot see anything happening in the video. > Something might be happening (such as the mechanical penthouse crashing down > through each floor all the way to the basement), or, maybe nothing is > happening (the penthouse dropped one floor and stopped). > > The last time we can see any of the building is at 1:15. > > Starts at 1:02, ends at 1:15 - that's 13 seconds, no matter how you slice > it. > > > >> WTC 1 & 2 were brought down by a combination of fuel laden 767's crashing > >> into them and the resulting fires. The evidence and facts allow anyone to > >> arrive at that conclusion. There is no evidence and are no facts to > >> support > >> any of the alternate theories - they are based on false information, some > >> times doctored evidence, misinterpretation of evidence, bad guesses, bad > >> science, or just wishful thinking. > > >> WTC 7 was brought down by the same thing that brought down 24 other > >> buildings in the area around the WTC towers - the collapsing towers. > > > Ha Ha Ha.. good one.. 24 other buildings collapsed just like wtc 7 all > > caused because of the twin towers.. nice way to spin it... > > Spin? Are you denying that these buildings were damaged or destroyed on > 9/11? What happened to them? What caused their damage or destruction? > > >> It clearly doesn't. The buildings were not designed to handle the huge > >> dynamic loads placed on the structure once the collapse initiate. There > >> are > >> no structural engineers that see anything suspicious or wrong about the > >> way > >> they collapse or the amount of time it took for them to collapse. Les > >> Robertson was *surprised* (and thankful) that they stood as long as they > >> did. > > > www.st911.org > > The Clowns for Truth site was funny the first time or two I read it... but, > the jokes are old and stale now. > > Which of their jokes do you like the best? > Hijackers are still alive? > The flight 93 CVR picking up passenger conversations? (Scholars can't read a > transcript?) > Christie Whitman telling workers at ground zero that it was OK to breathe > the dust? > > One of my favorites was always from Prof. Jones - the king clown - He claims > to have talked to a demolitions expert who has used controlled demolition to > bring down hundreds of buildings just like the WTC towers. > > That's pretty amazing considering that the tallest steel framed structure > brought down by controlled demolition to date is only 27 stories and > designed nothing at all like the WTC towers. Prof. Jones should have checked > this guy's credentials a little better. > > Then again, Alex Jones is pretty funny - he claims that in the Madrid Tower > fire, *none* of the steel beams were damaged or "even weakened"! LOL! I > guess he missed the part where the steel structure *collapsed* to the 17 > floor, because of the fires. > > He also came up with this one - WTC 7 had *no* damage from the WTC tower > collapsing on it other than a few broken windows, some dust and small fires! > > Alex must have an inability to view pictures or videos. > > The Clowns for Truth also came up with this whopper - The invisible > government had every bomber and SSBN on station and every US nuke ready to > launch, including all codes being input. 'They' told President Bush that if > he didn't go along with their 19 Arab hijackers story, they would launch > these nukes to start a global nuclear war! > > Amazing - not a single enlisted guy has felt he should mention this to > anyone. ... but they posted pictures of prisoners in Iraq. > > If you buy into these nutjob stories, you need serious help.