Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
Lauren Johnson Wrote:I guess your argument must be that because you say there were no booms picked up during the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, therefore the Banfield audio can be dismissed?

This is the only answer I have. The Banfield audio comes at a time when there is not a lot of background noise. If a fire truck was going by with its siren going, no loud booms will be detectable.

Why weren't they picked up on mics while the buildings were collapsing was for the same reason I gave for the Banfield audio except the opposite: there was a lot of noise -- the roar of a collapsing high rise building. Parsing out discrete sounds on directional mics meant for interview people as was Banfield's, could not have picked up the charges you are imagining. They just blend in the roar. During the initiation of the collapse, the charges used made less noise than the Banfield audio and could be hidden in the noise of the early collapse.

That's my best answer.


If you got experts to look at the collapse video they would tell you the "jets" Chandler refers to are pneumatic air blasts. You can see from their nature that they occur not at the inner core, as Chandler infers, but right there at the outer frame wall where the collapsing floors pushed compressed air blasts through the openings. A sharp observer would see the dust jets happen in horizontal uniformity with the corner jets happening at the same time as the middle jets. If these jets were the product of charges placed on the inner core columns they would happen in a radial pattern in obedience to the location of the core relative to the jets. Middle first then corners a split second later. Also, I already pointed-out that if you look at the You-Tube of controlled demolitions a normal CD charge produces nowhere near the gigantic overkill blast of those jets. So if the spooks were going to take down the tower covertly, and could do so with more discrete charges, why would they use these comical overkill blasts to do it when they could have done it less visibly?

Like Tony, Chandler also mushes his claims. He says the cascading charges do not happen on a floor by floor basis. However he doesn't explain what basis they did occur on? If they were going to place very precisely timed unzipping wave charges in the core then why would they not be on a floor by floor basis? It's obvious to anyone of any intelligence that Chandler is exploiting the uneveness of the natural collapse jets because of ductworks and uneven resistance. The truth is the jets do happen on a floor by floor basis and do evidence ROOSD. Once again Chandler fails to realize their slight uneveness is more a sign of natural collapse and differs from the precision timed progressive cascading charges would have had.

Your answer above isn't good enough and doesn't explain how, if the demolition booms were drowned-out by sirens, did the numerous witnesses you presented in your You-Tube video hear them then? Those witnesses were very clear in their statements that they heard clear and loud progressive "Boom, boom, boom, boom, booms". You can't have it both ways and serve us mush as forensic steak.

You and Tony haven't answered why they did the South Tower first if they were trying to imitate a natural collapse?

Nor did you answer why Chandler says the initiating charges at the top were explosives charges yet Tony says they were burning thermite cutter packs?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8


Messages In This Thread
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis - by Albert Doyle - 16-08-2013, 07:20 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WTC-7 Before Collapse - Video of activities inside and outside Peter Lemkin 0 4,959 04-12-2015, 09:45 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Detailed Analysis of WTC 7 Controlled Demolition Peter Lemkin 0 5,212 01-12-2015, 04:42 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis Tony Szamboti 4 4,001 04-11-2013, 07:11 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Analysis Summary Of 9-11-01 Insider Trading [with some very interesting facts, if true]! Peter Lemkin 4 5,502 28-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis: Redux Lauren Johnson 0 3,703 16-08-2013, 03:39 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  New Seismic Analysis Further Points to Controlled Demolition.... Peter Lemkin 0 3,683 03-12-2012, 05:21 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  911 Meta Analysis Jeffrey Orling 18 10,522 23-10-2012, 08:54 PM
Last Post: Albert Doyle
  STill the best and most comprehensive timeline and information source for 911-related events Peter Lemkin 0 2,667 10-08-2012, 08:10 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New theory explains collapse of Twin Towers- Aluminium and water explosions Magda Hassan 7 9,098 27-09-2011, 05:47 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  First Wikileaks Cable possibly related to 911, Al Quaeda, etc. Peter Lemkin 0 6,456 26-09-2011, 08:02 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)