911 CONGRATULATIONS!! - Truthers Force NIST to Change Final Report on WTC7!

Discussion in '9/11' started by Kokomojojo, Aug 14, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    its impossible to have freefall unless all the supporting elements are removed.

    the chart shows it freefell.

    all the supporting elements can only be removed globally by demolition. There is no rational argument that can defeat that.
     
  2. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    NIST hid nothing. They expanded on their initial explanation because a high school psychics teacher could not understand their report.

    Contrary to hiding anything they made their final report more layman friendly.
     
  3. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Invalid because straw man wear hats, blah,blah...FREE FALL (admitted by NIST). Any way you slice it....THEY LIED initially. Now supposedly only a small part was in free fall. They lied then. Why not now?
     
  4. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    well then you moved off of the official story and come up with your own fantasy.

    Its not my argument its purely a fact of physics. there is nothing to argue unless you are completely ignorant about physics.

    If you do not understand high school physics you do not belong in any wtc discussion.


    here are buildings that LOCALLY collapsed and DID NOT FREEFALL




    [​IMG]


    now stop lying.
     
  5. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The supporting elements were not removed globally. Neither NIST nor Chandler state this.

    A small portion of the building reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration for only 2.5 seconds, that does not equal global.
     
  6. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They showed the acceleration in their initial report, released to the public for critique. Nothing hidden, nothing lied about. Chandler couldn't understand it, so they expanded on their explanation in the final report to make it easier for laypeople.
     
  7. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It does equal steel being "removed" to allow that admitted free fall though.
     
  8. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Neither NIST nor Chandler make the claim that the entire building collapsed at the speed of free fall acceleration. A small portion of the building reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration, and did so for only 2.5 seconds.

    Chandler claims that the period was even less. (2.28 seconds)
     
  9. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0



    It offends them for you to show evidence which doesn't support their agenda. They can't see it because their eyes are covered and they are paid not to see.
     
  10. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    WTC7 did not globally collapse at the equivalent of free fall acceleration. A small portion of the building reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration, and did so for only 2.5 seconds.

    NIST and Chandler agree on this point.
     
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    hey everyone look at this freakin dance LMAO

    oh now its the equivalent so NISTS chart is really just a big lie and you know something no one else does.

    accept your red face we are all laughing our asses off watching the word games you are posting only to bury yourself furhter.
     
  12. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The charts posted show WTC7 did not globally collapse at the equivalent of free fall acceleration. A small portion of the building reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration, and did so for only 2.5 seconds.

    NIST and Chandler agree on this point, except Chandler thinks the free fall period was shorter than NIST does.
     
  13. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    someone explain to this person who has never opened a physics book about the laws of conservation of momentum and energy.

    I am gettting really bored with the empty meaningless trash being posted by him.

    try taking a high school course in physics.


    small portion

    [​IMG]

    BWAHAHAHAHA



    CONGRATULATIONS TRUTHERS THEY HAVE BEEN REDUCED TO BLATANT LIES AND MAKING UP TRASH NOW!

    LOVE IT


    TRUTHERS WIN!
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I understand the laws of conservation of momentum.

    The fact remains that WTC7 did not collapse globally at free fall acceleration. No laws were broken, or even stretched.
     
  15. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    You Posted No Fact No Data Just Your Own Fantasy Version Of The Event.

    THE CHARTS POSTED PROVE YOU WRONG.

    THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE WRONG AND CONTINUE TO FALSIFY THE EVENT CONSTITUTES A LIE
     
  16. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The charts posted clearly show WTC7 did not globally collapse at free fall acceleration. A small portion of the building reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration, and did so for only 2.5 seconds.

    The NIST and Chandler charts agree on this point, except Chandler thinks the free fall period was shorter than NIST does.
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The posted charts are the evidence. Look at the duration of free fall written on them.

    The charts posted clearly show WTC7 did not globally collapse at free fall acceleration. A small portion of the building reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration, and did so for only 2.5 seconds.

    WTC7 did not reach global free fall. Neither NIST nor Chandler claim it did.
     
  18. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    THE CHARTS SHOW YOU LIE WITHOUT CONSCIENCE AND THAT YOU NEVER CRACKED A PHYSICS BOOK IN YOUR LIFE AND ARE INCAPABLE OF READING CHART.


    [​IMG]
     
  19. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You Do Not Know The Difference Between Global And Local, You Do Not Know That Global Freefall Can Only Be Accomplished Through Demolition, You Play Word Games Pretending That The Equivalent Of Freefall Is Not Freefall, You Posted No Data To Support Your Portion Trash, You Are Just Spam Heckling.

    Anyone With A Physics Education Posting That Kind Of Trash Would Have Long Had A Red Face, But This Demonstrate You Do Not Even Have A High School Education In Physics NOR DO YOU KNOW STANDARD ARCHITECTURAL TERMS.

    suffice to say you are wholly and totally unqualified to make any determinations on the matter what so ever.
     
  20. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The posted chart clearly shows that the velocity of 'stage 2' of the collapse of the north roof line (the free fall part) lasted for only about 2.5 seconds.
     
  21. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Only a small portion (local) of WTC7 reached the equivalent of free fall acceleration.
    The building did not globally collapse at free fall acceleration. Neither NIST nor Chandler claim it did.
     
  22. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83

    only in your imagination.

    you need to find someone else to post for you because you are totally unqualified. man up and stop spam heckling and playing word games that you do not know the meaning of. you have contradicted yourself several times. find a topic you are qualified to speak to.
     
  23. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is not the acceleration "of the building". It is the acceleration of a point on the north wall. But since the wall did not break up on descent, it is a very close representation of the whole wall, too.

    The meme that "free fall acceleration means demolition" is simply wrong when sloppily applied.

    If a large structure buckles near its base over a many floor segment (as WTC7 did), with the buckling resulting in fracturing of connections, then the portion of the structure above the buckled segment will fall very near to free fall. During the time that the buckled segment is folding, no segments of the structure need be destroyed. (It is the destruction of various segments that slows down the descent.)

    The external walls of WTC7 were connected at hundreds of points to the interior of the building. The interior of the building began to fall earlier than the external wall. There is no doubt that the external wall was NOT an isolated body.

    IMO, it is very highly probable, near certain, that internal segments of the building dragged down the external wall, either directly, or by having heavy debris fall onto some of the lower cross beams that remained connected to the external wall.

    This demonstrably happened over 2.5 seconds of the collapse. It is not consistent over the full time of collapse. Therefore WTC7 did not globally collapse at free fall acceleration.

    (Thank you to Tfk.)
     
  24. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,705
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    [​IMG]


    It does not have to be consistant over the full duration of the descent. In fact you can see for yourself if you wanted to actually be honest that the buildings the wtc is being compared to that are acknowledged demolitions also do not freefall through out their whole descent.

    That is a debunker flunker from some flunky back yard debunker website who also never cracked a physics book.

    if it reaches freefall at anytime during the descent it can only happen through demolition as that means all structural support has been removed during THAT TIME PERIOD.

    You have no port in this storm to park your boat.

    You continue to use words of trade incorrectly and if those are words of a friend they use them incrrectly as well.


    these are collapses. They tip over, they partially fall in whatever they do not globally fail nearly straight down.


    [​IMG]



    Like I said you have no port in this storm to park your boat.
     
  25. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,713
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This thread has generated too many Reports for the moderators to deal with so the thread is being closed.

    Shiva_TD
    Site Moderator
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page