Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Tony Szamboti]

Your points have been answered and you have not ever explained why the columns would not be involved. All you are doing is saying otherwise. You are like a kid denying something in the face of clear evidence.

You're dodging the technical forensic arguments about the corner columns. Let it be duly noted.



You're also dodging answering why you and Chandler differ on such an important aspect as the type of initiation device. Also, duly noted.


Your dampered blasts claim was refuted by the fact your own witnesses in your own video claimed they were very loud and audible. Also, not answered. Also duly noted.



You know as well as I that those witnesses in your own video are referring to "booms" that are much louder than those in the Banfield video. Do we need to go back and look at them saying they heard "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom" in the context of those being timed charges blasting the floor columns? Also your own collapse video claims the prominent dust jets shooting out of the Tower were responsible for those booms (Which is pure evidence they weren't dampened isn't it?). There's no way that such a forthright and audible event as told by the witnesses would be missed by Burkett's microphone and you haven't come up with an answer for that.

You point is a crock. The dampered blasts were audible to people "in the building", in case you forgot where they were when they heard them.

You are trying to say it couldn't have been a controlled demolition without full blown C-4 type sounds and that is absolutely untrue. There are numerous ways to keep the sound level down at the beginning of the collapse and that is one reason thermitic substances would have been used, and interestingly these type of substances were found in the dust.

Your argument is akin to somebody seeing a stealth aircraft doing everything an aircraft does and saying they saw it, but you tell them it couldn't have been an aircraft because it wasn't picked up on your radar. All I ever say about the initiation is that it was caused by some form of demolition devices. That is what the response of the building shows, just like the stealth aircraft can be visually seen to behave like an aircraft without much of a radar signature. Additionally, once the collapse starts the roar of it would mask explosive sounds just like chaff masks the radar signature of non-stealth aircraft.

As shown here, your argument concerning explosive noise is seriously flawed as it does not consider efforts which could be made to reduce noise levels at the beginning of the collapse and that they would be masked during the collapse.