14-08-2013, 05:10 PM
Tony Szamboti Wrote:Nobody is saying the core did not drop over the full 12 stories, but it did not disintegrate over 12 stories generating 12 stories of rubble at once. It failed at the 98th floor and dropped, as evidenced by the antenna dropping before the exterior roofline.
What you aren't understanding is that the core failure doesn't allow 12 floor slabs to immediately contact each other. They can't do that, as they are connected to the columns, and 5 stories of columns would need to collapse before 5 floor slabs would be free to generate ROOSD. In other words, when the failure occurs at the 98th floor the 99th floor slab comes down onto the 98th floor slab, but not the other 11 floor slabs. They need to wait until their respective columns collapse. So 5 stories of columns would need to collapse before ROOSD would have the minimum number of floor slabs to generate it.
The real problem in the natural collapse theory concerns why the columns aren't resisting.
You're not being honest Mr Szamboti. You are once again diverting us to an irrelevant side argument that doesn't answer the point. Not only that the side argument itself isn't valid.
You are creating these specious side arguments because you are trying to avoid answering where and when exactly the mass of the 12 storey section impacted the building below? In your arguments you would almost think the top section never applied its 12 stories of mass to the building below. But even a child could see that's impossible because the video shows us the top section falling on the building below. If you have a sharp eye you can actually detect a brief instant of deceleration where the top section impacted the bottom section right around the flash-over. That was your firm contact and that is where the full 12 stories applied its mass to the bottom section. You never get around to admitting this because you are trying to avoid it.
You are arguing hocus pocus above because you yourself admitted the core in the upper section dropped. Therefore it wasn't supporting the floors. What you do is argue a specious point but then ignore the main point. That point is at some point the 12 storey top section impacted the main building below and when it did it delivered the plus 5 stories of mass you required as a threshold of ROOSD. The reason you avoid like the devil admitting at what point the dropping top section applied its weight to the building below is because you know the status of the floors is irrelevant to this. The top section had to apply its mass to the bottom section because science requires it. All you needed was for the upper-most floor in the lower building to have enough force applied to it to initiate ROOSD and that is what happened. There is no scenario where this force wasn't met (which is why you don't offer one besides a vaguely implied CD with no specifics).
What your argument does is indirectly suggest that somehow the upper core should have made solid contact with the lower core and resisted collapse. But any look at the specifics of that would show that the core was destabilized and broken and would not have met the lower core members squarely. The damaged area was a mess and the core pieces dropped in scattered randomness. So, where exactly is the resistance you allude to but never quite get around to describing? What you are avoiding admitting is a physical interface occurred between the top section and bottom where the requirements for ROOSD on the bottom section were met. The action of the drop pushed the outer frame outward enough and the inner core inward enough to free the bottom section's floor pads for dropping.
Proof of ROOSD is seen in the first dust jets at the very top. A sharp eye will detect the timing of those jets occurs after the floor drop and not before meaning they were caused by the drop and did not cause the drop itself. It they were explosives charges initiating the collapse they would have occurred sooner. A sharp eye will see they happen in perfect timing with ROOSD.
An explosives charge creates a very specific and identifiable audio fingerprint. It creates a sharp crack sonically that radiates out in the air ahead of the dust jet. This is unavoidable and never varies. Especially with such prominent dust jets as those seen in the falling tower video. It would be impossible for the numerous media microphones around the tower to not catch this distinct audio fingerprint. The reason why there were no such audio identifications is because the dust jets were caused by pneumatic air blasts and not explosives. This is a simple forensic determiner that is beautiful in its simplicity and fatal to the Controlled Demolition theory - which is why Tony is repeatedly unable to answer it. Thank you for your "rebuttal"...