Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I
#91
Less than satisfying.

I neither stated nor implied that evenly spaced "booms" were impossible.

IF all your IFs are granted, then the possibility of even spacing is enhanced.

But does not the principle of parsimony suggest otherwise?
Reply
#92
Charles,

I don't have x ray vision and don't KNOW what was going on. I offer possible scenarios based on the structure and how it might come apart supported by the visual record. I don't claim my suggested mechanism is the only one... But assigning everything to a string of timed explosives which closely resemble the gravitational speed of collapse is a bit of a stretch. Who thinks of such plans?

Jack.. set the sequence timer to make it sound like a collapse... no one will know the difference.

Talk about parsimony eh...
Reply
#93
There were emergency personnel a lot closer to WTC 7 who were in a position to hear any spaced demolition charges as seen in the conventional demolition videos. Those department store charges have a pretty distinct sharp crack to the explosion that would have been heard by those closer in.
Reply
#94
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Charles,

I don't have x ray vision and don't KNOW what was going on. I offer possible scenarios based on the structure and how it might come apart supported by the visual record. I don't claim my suggested mechanism is the only one... But assigning everything to a string of timed explosives which closely resemble the gravitational speed of collapse is a bit of a stretch. Who thinks of such plans?

Jack.. set the sequence timer to make it sound like a collapse... no one will know the difference.

Talk about parsimony eh...

The timing of the explosions should be compared to established patterns within controlled demolitions.

Your "Jack" drama is just that: pure fiction of the Straw Man variety. You could easily assign collapse values to match the timing of the "booms" -- which is what you did.

And while the floors may have been equally spaced, they were not equally loaded.
Reply
#95
Albert Doyle Wrote:There were emergency personnel a lot closer

Than whom?


Albert Doyle Wrote:to WTC 7

Than what?

[quote=Albert Doyle]who were in a position to hear any spaced demolition charges as seen

Do you mean "heard"?


Albert Doyle Wrote:in the conventional demolition videos. Those department store charges

WHAT?


Albert Doyle Wrote:have a pretty distinct sharp crack to the explosion that would have been heard by those closer in.

CRACK???


Albert, it's difficult enough to follow your "logic" without having it expressed in Pidgin English.
Reply
#96
I think the post was clear enough. If you watch the department store video in this thread the demolition charges go off with a distinct crack that isn't seen in the oscilloscope booms. If WTC 7 was a controlled demolition why didn't its charges 'crack' like those in the department store video? That isn't so difficult to understand.

Closer than Ashley Banfield.
Reply
#97
Charles Drago Wrote:[quote=Jeffrey Orling]Charles,


And while the floors may have been equally spaced, they were not equally loaded.

Wrong... the difference in the floor loads was insignificant compared to the structure that supported the live loads. You are talking about something you don't know much about.... obviously.
Reply
#98
I don't think anyone has shown that the audio spectrum signature of the video matches those from a CD. If so let's see the analysis.
Reply
#99
If you look at the Ashleigh Banfield video there's a distinct dust cloud rising BEFORE the "booms". What is causing that abnormal dust cloud behind her? I'll tell you what it is. It's the falling of WTC-7. Which means that video is dishonest and is lying about the timing of what they are showing. This makes it much much more likely, to the point of certainty, that the booms you are being shown are the building collapsing.

Also, go back and watch their oscilloscope presentation. The booms are not evenly spaced. They group together towards the end as they would with the accelerating progress of a collapse. But the dishonest video regroups them into identically even spacing when they do their analysis.


.
Reply
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:
Charles Drago Wrote:[quote=Jeffrey Orling]Charles,


And while the floors may have been equally spaced, they were not equally loaded.

Wrong... the difference in the floor loads was insignificant compared to the structure that supported the live loads. You are talking about something you don't know much about.... obviously.



Correct Jeffrey. Charles is ignorant of the basic principle of Galileo's law.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  What A Coincidence......Boeing aircraft part found three blocks from WTC - yesterday! Peter Lemkin 5 6,210 30-04-2013, 09:38 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  World Trade Center Buildings (and Others?) Pre-Rigged for Controlled Demolition: A Hypothesis Charles Drago 42 19,972 26-03-2013, 07:07 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  How Demolition Charges Were Placed in WTC 1 AND 2: A Hypothesis Charles Drago 37 20,422 17-08-2011, 06:26 AM
Last Post: James Lewis
  WTC Employee Talks About Pre-911 Power Outages All Weekend! Peter Lemkin 1 3,516 16-11-2010, 10:25 PM
Last Post: Myra Bronstein
  A Little Known Coincidence [or Part of Conspiracy] Peter Lemkin 0 3,144 25-09-2010, 12:09 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Jack Abramoff released from prison early ... for his part in the 9/11 cover up? Ed Jewett 2 3,804 10-06-2010, 07:09 AM
Last Post: Carsten Wiethoff
  Good 12 Part Video Lecture On 911 Nanothermite! Peter Lemkin 4 4,060 20-08-2009, 05:49 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Wheels Within Wheels - And a Bit-Part Walk-On! Peter Lemkin 1 3,078 23-04-2009, 08:33 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Anthrax Attacks Were Part & Parcel Of 911 Peter Lemkin 4 4,118 24-03-2009, 07:03 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  SHADOWPLAY: Part 1, 9/11 PUPPETMASTERS Paul Rigby 0 3,865 17-10-2008, 11:37 AM
Last Post: Paul Rigby

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)