forum Politics and Society ›› 9/11 WTC 7 Steel Experiment: Eutectic Steel ›› new reply Post Reply
the cat
trash digger
7,241 Posts
34/M/DC


online   (5)
July 6 2014 6:47 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Osama Bin Laden's family is basically a J Crew ad
Bashar al-Asad
In sha'Allah
37,156 Posts
30/M/PA


offline   (11)
July 6 2014 8:28 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: planet of the apes

Originally posted by: corn husk

Originally posted by: G uNiT UgLy

.


Bashar al-Asad
In sha'Allah
37,156 Posts
30/M/PA


offline   (11)
July 6 2014 8:31 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Cumby


IsaacNewton
Time Husk
5 Posts
31/M/WA


offline   (1)
September 24 2014 5:22 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
Really guys? This is eighth grade physics stuff.... And you're still arguing about it over a decade later? All you need is one fact to sort out whether or not WTC7 was brought down by explosives.... gravitational acceleration.
IsaacNewton
Time Husk
5 Posts
31/M/WA


offline   (1)
September 25 2014 2:44 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
The conditions required for gravitational acceleration to occur have been known for centuries....

"The condition under which a body is, literally, free to fall under the influence of the local gravitational field with no resistance to its acceleration."....



....and the progressive collapse of the building (starting with column 79 on the left)...

....that essentially happens all at once....



....is clearly inconsistent with what we empirically know of natural progressive structural failure (defined as a time consuming process of individual/sequential/simultaneous failures involving a number of related structural components).

It's a matter of empirical fact that, even if a giant laser beam were to suddenly vaporize all but the North Face of the building, resulting in the remaining exterior columns immediately beginning to buckle all at once, free fall still would not occur.

The strength of buckled columns, whether one or a thousand, whether one at a time or all at once (or any combination thereof) won't just go from 100% to 0% when they buckle, they'll go from 100% to 0% while they buckle and that takes time.

The mechanism of buckling (a mode of natural progressive structural failure), whether caused by heat....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1ad9d2e8f520c5ad7e.gif

....or by overloading....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1ad9d2e8f520c5ad7e.gif]

....absolutely cannot create the conditions required for gravitational acceleration to occur, it's literally impossible. Some force must be introduced to quickly remove all support from beneath the literally falling visible upper part of the building seen in the video....



It's a physical impossibility for the lower part of the asymmetrically damaged building (reportedly three core columns and nine perimeter columns) to have naturally progressively collapsed in any way that could result in the upper part of the building symmetrically descending straight down through itself (NIST probable collapse sequence starting with column 79 circled below) at anything near gravitational acceleration for any period of time....



....and there is absolutely no mode or combination of modes of natural progressive structural failure driven solely by gravity that can ever give rise to the conditions required (below) for free fall to have occurred at any point during it's descent....


The scenario (below) is an absolute physical impossibility....


There is simply no point during a natural progressive gravity driven collapse of a steel frame skyscraper like this where one could say....

"Hold it.... right there! That's the point where all the steel columns and structural components that were supporting the building just a moment ago (with an area greater than that of a football field) will undoubtedly be found to be behaving in a manner very much like air (below left). It will take very careful calculation to tell the fall times apart during this free fall period of the ongoing progressive structural failure (below right)"....



Not only is it improbable, it's impossible that the lower asymmetrically damaged part of the building could have naturally progressively collapsed in a way that resulted in the upper part of the building actually accelerating as it descended symmetrically straight down through itself, through the path of greatest resistance (below right), and that driven on solely by gravity, it actually continued to accelerate so nearly to gravitational acceleration (below left) as to require very careful calculation for any difference between the two to be detected....



For the 2.25 seconds (eight stories, approximately 105 feet) that we know the upper part of the building literally fell at gravitational acceleration it cannot have been using any of it's potential energy to crush the building contents, columns and other structural components beneath it and undergo free fall at the same time....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1ad9d2e8f520c5ad7e.gif

Some other force powerful enough to quickly remove all support from beneath the upper part of the building as it descended must be introduced to explain the observed rate of descent during the 2.25 second period of gravitational acceleration.

For the 2.25 seconds that the building iliterally fell at gravitational acceleration, no other force powerful enough to quickly remove all support from beneath the upper part of the building was seen to be introduced from outside the building, and no other force powerful enough to quickly remove all support from beneath the upper part of the building is known to have existed inside the building as an element or normal function of it's infrastructure.

For a load supported by a column to descend at gravitational acceleration, all support must be quickly removed, there's absolutely no other way. It must be knocked out, pulled out, blown out, vaporized, etc.

Since no eight story tall boulders were seen rumbling through Manhatten that day that could have quickly knocked out all support....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1a...8f520c5ad7e.gif

....and no suspicious looking Frenchmen were spotted rigging for verinage (another form of controlled demolition) the night before that could have quickly pulled out the support....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1a...8f520c5ad7e.gif]

....and no bombs or rockets were seen to be dropped on/fired at it that could have quickly blown out all support....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1a...8f520c5ad7e.gif

....and no giant laser beams or other secret weapons were being tested in the area that could have quickly vaporized all support....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1a...8f520c5ad7e.gif

....and no other force capable of quickly removing all support from beneath the upper part of the building existed in the building as a normal function of it's infrastructure (blue below)....



....it naturally follows that whatever the other force was that must be introduced to explain the observed 2.25 seconds of descent at gravitional acceleration, it must have been introduced some time before the event, and unless someone can show how the other force that must be introduced either during or just before the collapse of the building was introduced from outside the building, or that it was already existing inside the building as a normal function of it's infrastructure, the process of elimination really leaves only one possible explanation for the building's behaviour.

Some energetic material powerful enough to quickly remove all support from beneath the upper part of the building during the 2.25 second period of gravitational acceleration must have been physically transported inside the building some time before the event, it had to be brought in.

The explosion model (below) is the only one....


....that can realistically match and empirically be expected to create the conditions (below) that we know must have existed....



....beneath the literally falling visible upper part of the building (below) during its observed largely symmetrical descent at gravitational acceleration for approximately 105 feet in 2.25 seconds....



The undisputed (both the NIST and independent researchers alike agree) confirmed observation of a significant period of gravitational acceleration....



....means an explosion, or a number of explosions, must have occurred that was powerful enough to quickly remove all support from beneath the upper part of the building (below right), either all at once or incrementally in advance of its descent, permitting it to descend at gravitational acceleration for the observed period and under the conditions required (below left) for free fall to occur....



Though the possible composition and placement of the explosives can be endleessly debated, the empirically verifiable fact that they were indeed composed and placed cannot.

The building was brought down by explosives.... that's just the way it is.
Dwarno
7/11 = My Real Job
110 Posts
43/M/PA


offline   (7)
December 18 2015 1:32 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
.


Jewz.
crunkmoose
Fuck Nazis.
24,502 Posts
60/M/MA


offline   (9)
December 18 2015 5:59 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
My favorite part of this kind of insanity is the idea that ALL jews must automatically be in on the vast conspiracy. Of course, outside of secret messages hidden in everything including star wars posters for NO GOOD REASON there is no evidence for these conspiracies... and, of course, as with all good conspiracies they leave plenty of easy to find, totally needless and pointless clues for all the fruit bats out there to find.
Bashar al-Asad
In sha'Allah
37,156 Posts
30/M/PA


offline   (11)
February 27 2016 11:17 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
robert iger THE JEW
Aunt_Pee
mr. birthdaysex
8,600 Posts
34/M/NC


online   (12)
October 29 2016 11:18 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Bashar al-Asad

robert iger THE JEW




lolol
Aunt_Pee
mr. birthdaysex
8,600 Posts
34/M/NC


online   (12)
October 29 2016 11:21 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
i wonder how much time user issacnewton spent copying and pasting that shit into a thread no one ever gave a fuck about, started by another user who no one takes seriously. out of the 5 post he made in 2014 he wasted his time giving us all a real revelation about the 9/11 conspiracy and the physics of a collapsing sky scraper.


great jerb
the cat
trash digger
7,241 Posts
34/M/DC


online   (5)
October 30 2016 1:04 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
The reason all the "physics" these assholes post is completely wrong is because they don't discriminate between an active and static "load", which is basically day 1 of studying the subject seriously. So for example most people on this forum could hold 135 lbs over their head, a bar and two 45s. Not lift it necessarily, but just holding it, locked out. But if you drop 135 on one of our heads when we're not bracing for it from 10 feet up we're probably going to eat shit. I might have already posted this somewhere in this thread but don't care.
forum Politics and Society ›› 9/11 WTC 7 Steel Experiment: Eutectic Steel ›› new reply Post Reply

Quick Reply - RE: 9/11 WTC 7 Steel Experiment: Eutectic Steel

Connect with Facebook to comment: Login w/FB

or Sign up free! - or login:







Subject


wrap selection with italics
wrap selection with bold
insert less than symbol
insert greater than symbol


google image Insert Google Images
Share a Band



Your ad here?