Jim Fetzer Makes Front Cover of "City Pages"

The Minneapolis/St. Paul "City Pages" magazine has published a long Cover Story on Jim Fetzer called "The Man Who Thought He Knew Too Much". The article covers a lot of ground, and includes hyperlinks to ST911, Loose Change, Assassination Science, In Plane Sight and Fetzer's appearance on FOX NEWS. It is also biographical and covers public feuds Fetzer has had with Tink Thompson and Thomas Bieter.

In other news, tomorrow Fetzer interviews Dr. Judy Wood, who has degrees and education in various types of Engineering, including Civil Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, Materials Engineering Science, and Mechanical Engineering.

29 June 2006
Interview: Judy Wood will be the guest on
"Non-Random Thoughts" with host Jim Fetzer
11 AM to 1 PM/CT (Noon-2 PM/ET and 9-11 AM/PT)

On RBN radio.

Wood is the author of this Billiard Ball study.

UPDATE: You can now download the interview from the RBN archive for Thursday, June 29th.

the Judy Wood interview is

the Judy Wood interview is one of the worst interviews I have ever heard thus far on this subject. Here we have a learned individual whose opinion and stories I wish to hear and Fetz does nothing but pontificate on and on and on never allowing the interview process to naturally develop. Jim Fetzer should check his ego at the door and STFU.

Judy Wood - an "engineer"

Judy Wood - an "engineer" who specializes in false teeth. No wonder the world think you guys are the clown-shoe morons...

I've listened to this a

I've listened to this a couple times now.

My main bone with Fetzer is he's hung up on the left/right paradigm, the NeoCons as the source of evil (incl. 911), their stealing elections, etc. This is counterproductive at this point, and it just calls up the still well programmed sheeple's left/right [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme"]meme[/URL], and through that trusty lense, they get a mental logic-pass to discount Fetzer's message coz "he's a lefty".

Fetzer also goes into the fruits and virtues of liberalism from time to time, though he didn't on this Colmes show, thankfully. His droppings about NeoCons and stolen elections in this show though, were "clues" to the left/right Blue Pill dupes as to where Fetzer's coming from, and that surely caused many of said left/right dupes to go "buzz-click, lefty alert, I've heard enough."

The Dem'rats voted for the wars "in response to 911", the patriot act, the End of Transparent Elections Act, played their role in the Bipartisan 911 Whitewash Report. WTC-Bombing 1, and the OKC bombing, were TPTB/Shadow Gummit black ops under Clinton's watch. Pinning 9/11 on the NeoCons is a red herring.... as though getting rid of the NeoCons would make any difference in the PTB/NWO/Shadow Gummit power structure pulling all the strings.

Other than that he did a fairly good job, in a challenging dialog environment.

oops meant to post the above

oops meant to post the above in the Colmes radio thread. T'would have been reply number five-hundred-something, I think.

Here's that link I attempted

Here's that link I attempted for "MEME" above,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme
good readin! We've been swimming in media/hollywood engineered memes all our lives... you'll be a wiser person for understanding what an art and science they are. Social Engineering 101.

Unfortunately that billiard

Unfortunately that billiard ball study isn't very good. It assumes that an impacted floor is merely allowed to begin free-fall descent and not imparted with any of the kinetic energy of the falling floors. I wouldn't use it as a reference; it's too easy to debunk.

Dennis Hastert: "Loose Lips

Dennis Hastert: "Loose Lips Kill Americans"

Could it be that the Republican party is trying to paint an ugly picture for whistleblowers? Are they trying to set into the minds of the American people the idea that whistleblowing is bad? So that when someone comes forward, they are frowned upon? Rather Karl Rovish if you ask me.

Village Voice Media is owned

Village Voice Media is owned by investors represented by Goldman Sachs, Weiss, Peck & Greer, and Trimaran Capital Partners. The CEO is David Schneiderman, a former Voice editor. I have my doubts about their intent in publishing 9/11 Truth information. I'm sure it has to do with some mind control scam the syndicate has up their sleeve.

http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0543/051026_news_merger.php

Today I spoke to the new manager at the bank I do business with and found out she is from Syria. I told her how I sympathize with how the Jewish controlled media makes Arabs look like an enemy and gave her a copy of Loose Change 2. I also made two Secret Friends today. It was strange how I felt like I knew them before. It was like Deja Blue

http://search.cadburyschweppes.com/DisplayPage.aspx?grab_id=211&page_id=...

One showed an interest in my Deception Dollar Fraudulent Event Note but declined my offer of an original Loose Change 2 still in it's wrapper! However, we did all enjoy a Coca-Cola BlaK over Ice. Body Language reveals many truths. I find it more discerning to notice what a person doesn't say rather than what they do say.

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/buffett.html

Is It Safe?

http://www.fooledagainon911.com/downloads/FooledAgainT1.avi

"No wonder the world think

"No wonder the world think you guys are the clown-shoe morons..."

If I had a pair of clown shoes they might help attract more attention so I could hand out more flyers, that's a groovy idea!

Plus, being a moron hasn't ever gotten in the way of my Truth work, maybe it makes me more likeable.

Send the world my way, troll, because everybody's gotta learn sometime (hat tip to J.A.)

freshly vlogged: Second

freshly vlogged:

Second attack: The "no-hit" ABC7 CGI
wtc second attack

9/11youtube watch
The ABC7 CGI "mistake" plane
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7pmiXinq2O0&search=fake%20plane

mirrored as FLV file (you need FLV player) at http://911closeup.com/nico/CGIABC7_passing.flv

(*thx to "didiklomberg" 06/28)

also up:
Fooled Again on 911 -9/11 TV Fakery presented in L.A.

This is the video shown by Jimmy Walter at the Planehugger's Last Stand conference in LA.

Oregon Truther: It's true

Oregon Truther: It's true that this theory models a sequence of intiation rather than kinetic energy transfer, and that is an error really, but if you take kinetic energy transfer into account that would slow the rate of collapse considerably as well, right? Also have you tried contacting Judy Woods about the error in her model?

I just sent this letter: It

I just sent this letter:

It has been pointed out to me that your billiard ball model does not take the transfer of kinetic energy
into account. That is as each ball hit the next it would transfer some of its energy to the next ball sending it flying down at a faster rate than the ball would travel if it were merely dropped. Again, the
balls would begin their journey down at a greater speed than the speed 32 feet per second.
Could you create a model that would take this effect into account? Also if you could consider the accumulated mass each floor would provide that would be helpful as well.

I'm guessing we'd still be talking about a collapse that is slower than free fall speed because the
kinetic energy transfer would slow the collapse, but I'm not positive.

Thanks.

Douglas Lain

OT G. Edward Griffin, author

OT
G. Edward Griffin, author of "The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve", published an article today called "IS BUILDING SEVEN THE SMOKING GUN OF 9/11?"
http://freedomforceinternational.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=Bldg7...

nico what? anyway..... my

nico what?

anyway.....

my hometown area (N.E. PA) apparently has a curfew enforced and national guard getting ready, floods, rain, and helicopters all over the place.

Anyone from the N.E. PA area here? 10 more days of rain possible...

Are we the next Katrina?

G. Edward Griffin is not a

G. Edward Griffin is not a source I'd quote.

G. Edward Griffin is not a

G. Edward Griffin is not a source I'd quote.

cryptic.

care to expand?

Here's amazon link to his Fed Reserve book,
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0912986395/sr=8-1/qid=1151547015/ref=sr...

gets good reviews. Also watch the introductory video at the top of his site, to see what he's about,
http://freedomforceinternational.org

Nico, I respect that you

Nico, I respect that you believe CGI were used to stage terror attacks in NYC on 9/11 but it's a good idea not to talk about it. It's only hurting the movement even further, that if you care.

Judy Wood - an "engineer"

Judy Wood - an "engineer" who specializes in false teeth. No wonder the world think you guys are the clown-shoe morons...
Anonymous | 06.28.06 - 8:51 pm |
__________---
you know what al-anon? even if she were a simple escalator repairman her thesis should speak for itself. something that you well know already. if you think there is a flaw in her thesis then you should e-mail her and let her know about it. you would be famous!
________________

OT: I was searching for

OT: I was searching for some info on the towers and I found this little gem. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/13/towers-collapse.htm It's a USA Today article from 9/12/01 that explains the "pancake" theory. Wow...they were able to figure out how the towers collapsed within 24 hrs. Thats pretty impressive. How the heck did they get in there and examine all the steel and pulverized concrete with the rescue efforts still going on. They must have had some pretty good instruments. I love how they make a big deal over the damage that the plane caused and the extreme heat from the "raging inferno", but then they give building 7 a little blurb in the last paragraph and don't even try to explain it.

"ow! you are interfering

"ow! you are interfering with my movement!"
__________---

I don't know a lot about

I don't know a lot about him, but I know he wrote a book about how Capitalists funded the Russian Revolution, and while there be truth in some of the particulars the overall conclusion is absurd. Also he holds a conspiratorial view of history which is simplistic and wrong headed. That isn't to say conspiracies don't occur, but I don't hold a view that puts conspiracies at the center.

Tbone I was thinking the

Tbone

I was thinking the same. It's almost as if they had the answers as to why the towers collasped all laid out and ready to be addressed before the attacks took place before 9/11, otherwise it's just impossible to come to a conclusion in just several hours.

assumes that an impacted

assumes that an impacted floor is merely allowed to begin free-fall descent and not imparted with any of the kinetic energy of the falling floors.

and your statement assumes that the impacted floors do not hinder in any way the falling floors. you should e-mail janedoe with your concern.
_____________

WTC architect said the

WTC architect said the towers exploded in article on 9/12/01

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/wtc.architect.cnna/

I wasn't aware that the

I wasn't aware that the pancake theory was made on 9/12/01.

james ha: I'm not assuming

james ha: I'm not assuming that the impact doesn't slow the rate of collapse at all, but rather I'm suggesting that the acceleration of the collapsing floors would cause the lower floors to start their descent at a faster rate than 32 feet per second.
Again we're not talking about the towers but a billiard ball model that doesn't account for any structural resistance like steel columns. That's her model.

james ha: I did email Judy

james ha: I did email Judy Woods with my concern.

if there were truly an error

if there were truly an error in janedoe's model it would have been brought to her attention by now and she would have made the appropriate correction by now.
_____---

doug, will you post her

doug, will you post her response? or may i send you my e-address and would you let me know?
_____---

TBONE: my favorite line from

TBONE:
my favorite line from that article was:

"The buildings imploded just as they would if demolition experts had been hired to do the job."

james ha: I'll see if she

james ha: I'll see if she responds and will let me post her response. I also emailed Steve Jones.

DHS, That is a gem. here's

DHS,

That is a gem. here's another good one, "It was like a doughnut with this core element providing vertical support"

Mmmmmmmmm. Pancakes and doughnuts!

Now with the thermite/mate

Now with the thermite/mate hypothisis they can ad, "and due to the intense heat from the steamy hot jelly-like core filling, we now can have a complete breakfast."

It's funny how you can tell

It's funny how you can tell when there is a new story up on the main page on this site. The room suddenly gets empty.

I don't know a lot about

I don't know a lot about him, but I know he wrote a book about how Capitalists funded the Russian Revolution, and while there be truth in some of the particulars the overall conclusion is absurd. Also he holds a conspiratorial view of history which is simplistic and wrong headed. That isn't to say conspiracies don't occur, but I don't hold a view that puts conspiracies at the center.
douglas lain | Homepage | 06.28.06 - 10:34 pm | #

I read Griffin's book on the Fed, and he explains the idea of the "accidental view of history" that we're taught by schools and textbooks, and the "conspiratorial view of history" which he advocates, with secret societies (core being central bankers) calling the shots. Very eye opening, I highly recommend his book,
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0912986395/sr=8-1/qid=1151547015/ref=sr...
(the reader reviews offer alot of insight..)

Also, I like this free online e-book "The Police State Road Map" which borrows from G. Edward Griffin, Alex Jones and others-- almost like a Cliffs Notes version of Griffin's and Jones' messages:
http://policestateplanning.com/id19.htm

I don't necessarily

I don't necessarily subscribe to an accidental view of history. Societies are consciously built, but criminal conspiracies are not at the center of history. They are a byproduct of the sorts of institutions we create. That's my view anyhow.

doug, cool - and if i'd

doug, cool - and if i'd thought about it a little before i asked i would've added if it's alright with her.
__________-

dz or Somebigguy, would you

dz or Somebigguy, would you please ban AmandaReconwith already.

Thx

here's an audio lecture of

here's an audio lecture of "The Creature from Jekyll Island" ...

over an hour long

http://www.unitedslavesofamerica.org/creature.rm

(real media format)

RE: Nico Haupt WTF, how can

RE: Nico Haupt
WTF, how can u use videos with bad compression from utube.com ??? Its planted evidence from disinfo agents. I can make hundreds of this videos with Vegas.

Free fall speed? kinetic

Free fall speed? kinetic energy?

I don't think the energy could push the floors faster than the energy they possess by falling from gravity - or true freefall speed so any collapse couldn't fall faster than freefall. (Second law) It may fall slower, no doubt.

iced ink: Freefall is a

iced ink: Freefall is a process of acceleration. An object falling at freefall speed is going to be moving faster as it falls. As an object falls it builds up energy and if it hit another object as falls down and has built up enough kenetic energy to overcome the resistance it may push the object to move. In the case of floating billiard balls (which is Woods example) a falling billiard ball that impacts another and transfers all of its kinetic energy to that other ball will send the ball it hits flying down at a faster speed than the original speed of freefall.

Iced Ink: To clarify, the

Iced Ink: To clarify, the impacted ball won't fall at a faster rate of acceleration, but at a faster original speed.

http://911tvfakery.blogspot.c

http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/
Didi Klomberg: I did the WABC 7 "remake" (06/29)

Didi Klomberg just wrote me back via YOUTUBE and confirmed, that this W-ABC 7 "flyby" CGI was his own remake based on the original CGI 'fake aircraft' CGI from the live broadcast on Sep11th.

He wrote that he did it by himself "....just as the other one on the first plane :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeFhO2sTjXk
The reason why I made it I tell in the comments of the clip above.
Some people believe I want to make fun out of 9/11 victims but that's not true.
I don't know anything about a conspiracy-theory or whatever. I wanted to change these images that have changed the world at still make them strong images with a slight different meaning.
That's all..."

I still read the silly "Kyle

I still read the silly "Kyle Hence" -brainwash meme of something "hurting the movement".

9/11 truthlings will never wake up, even after the salon article.
Btw, that makes it 5 lines about 9/11 TV fakery in the last 7 months: 3 words in village voice, 1 line in Toronto Sun and now 4 more, but misleading lines in Salon, while the 9/11 truthling chaos gets 5 Pages (!).

the only thing which hurts are the butterbrains of planehuggers and the empty IQ echo of limited hangouters :)

Salon: Pulp Fiction stylish article gives only 4 lines for 9/11 TV Fakery while belittling 9/11 truthlings
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/2006/06/salon-pulp-fiction-stylish-artic...
http://geobay.com/56c6c2

I still read the silly "Kyle

I still read the silly "Kyle Hence" -brainwash meme of something "hurting the movement".

9/11 truthlings will never wake up, even after the salon article.
Btw, that makes it 5 lines about 9/11 TV fakery in the last 7 months: 3 words in village voice, 1 line in Toronto Sun and now 4 more, but misleading lines in Salon, while the 9/11 truthling chaos gets 5 Pages (!).

the only thing which hurts are the butterbrains of planehuggers and the empty IQ echo of limited hangouters

Salon: Pulp Fiction stylish article gives only 4 lines for 9/11 TV Fakery while belittling 9/11 truthlings
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/...sh- article.html
http://geobay.com/56c6c2
Nico Haupt aka ewing2001 | Homepage | 06.29.06 - 4:56 am | #

*Cough* Bullshit.

douglas lain Using that

douglas lain

Using that logic - would one conclude that a collapsing building can fall SOONER than one ball dropped with no resistance?
sorry for my ignorance...

"you know what al-anon? even

"you know what al-anon? even if she were a simple escalator repairman her thesis should speak for itself. something that you well know already. if you think there is a flaw in her thesis then you should e-mail her and let her know about it. you would be famous!"

Her thesis already speaks for itself. It has been debunked, she knows it. So quit defending nonsense.

oh is that so tom? has

oh is that so tom? has janedoe's thesis been debunked and she knows it? who has done this debunking and where is the link to it? it is you who are the nonsense.
__________---

Heads up fot tomorrow

Heads up fot tomorrow (Friday) night:

30 June 2006:
Interview: Jim Fetzer will be the guest
discussing 9/11 with Laura Ingraham
9:30 AM/CT (10:30 AM/ET, 7:30 AM/PT)
http://www.lauraingraham.com/site

Does anyone know how ingrahams radio show numbers compare to colmes?

Why does everyone always say

Why does everyone always say there were only two fires in WTC-7? From the pictures alone one can see that there were fires at least on three floors.

Wow, zero air resistance nor

Wow, zero air resistance nor absorption of energy from things being broken/crushed inside the WTC???

Nico, go back to Germany. We

Nico, go back to Germany. We don't need SS agents spreading cartoon propaganda here!

on that fetzer tv

on that fetzer tv appearance....

if they try to bring up a smear on respecting the 911 families---there is a thread at libertyforum where they got a letter from 'mrs mariana'

griping out bush for covering up 911
(victims family thread)

douglas lain - you are

douglas lain - you are forgetting an important concept in your analysis, conservation of energy.

Hypothetical: Ball A is free falling and impacts Ball B. Any kinetic energy ABSORBED by Ball B must be LOST by Ball A. In other words, in the process of speeding up Ball B, Ball A will slow down, then start speeding up again due to gravity. In fact, if all of Ball A's kinetic energy is transferred to Ball B, then Ball A will slow to a speed of 0, then start accellerating again due to gravity. This would indicate to me that the assumption that each billiard ball starts at 0 is not at all far fetched. I think you are under the impression that Ball A will continue accellerating without slowing down at all after impacting Ball B, which is incorrect.

Also, although I haven't studied the billiard ball analysis thoroughly, it doesn't appear that she took into account the massive amount of energy it would have taken to convert the billiard balls into extremely fine dust, which would slow the balls' descent even more.

Yes, Seve. And air

Yes, Seve. And air resistance, friction must be accounted for too.

Correction: I said tomorrow

Correction: I said tomorrow night, I meant morning!

30 June 2006:
Interview: Jim Fetzer will be the guest
discussing 9/11 with Laura Ingraham
9:30 AM/CT (10:30 AM/ET, 7:30 AM/PT)
http://www.lauraingraham.com/site

seve b - it doesn't appear

seve b -
it doesn't appear that she took into account the massive amount of energy it would have taken to convert the billiard balls into extremely fine dust, which would slow the balls' descent even more.

isn't that one of the main points that her thesis makes? - that the NIST report does not account for the massive amount of energy it would have taken to convert the floors into extremely fine dust.

from her thesis:
"If there was enough kinetic energy for pulverization, there will be pancaking or pulverization, but not both."
__________----

@ Douglas Lain: The modell

@ Douglas Lain: The modell of conspiracy at the center of our civilization a far fetched theory?

Not so fast.

Reign fuels conspiracy, as the interest of the rulers is mostly diametral to the ones who are ruled.

I would go that far and say: The idea of reign itself ist the biggest and longest and enduring conspiracy itself.

We can't think beyond the limit of reign. We even think, reign becomes more acceptable, if we chose between two different rulers. Like someone said: The pigs chose their right slaughter. Every other form of living is beeing harassed, wipet out, ignored, marginalized.

The only thing one can say is that the direct effects of reign became more imperceptible, as the methods and means became invisible.

Like our money system that kept us as interest and debt slaves.
Or our organisation of "work".

Think about it.

Don't throw the experience out of a thousand years of anarchy thinking away.

Here come the trolls Tom,

Here come the trolls Tom, Vesa, and Anonymous!

People can find in depth (and I mean in depth) articles/essays by Wood and others at st911.org or physics911.net.

Feel free to "debunk" after studying them, trolls.

they cannot debunk. tom is

they cannot debunk. tom is allowed to make sweeping declarations of dismissal but is unable to debunk or even link to someone who has.
_____--

sitting bull: You've given

sitting bull: You've given me something to think about. I think heirarchies and systems of control are structural and bring on conspiracies...

iced ink: I think it would still fall considerably slower than the rate of free fall...and remember this is a billiard ball model and does not take resistance into account at all. This is not a WTC collapse model, just a billiard ball model which might be useful. It's just supposed to take energy transfer into account and be as generous as it can be, but it it doesn't really take energy transfer into account.

If billiard ball a strikes billiard ball b and transfers some of its energy to billiard ball b then it will move ball b at a speed that is faster than the intial speed of freefall, but not at a greater acceleration. The total collapse will still be longer than one ball falling without any energy transfer, but faster than one ball intiating the next which intiates the next and so on.

ball b would still be

ball b would still be starting at 0 wouldn't it?
__________

james ha: My thought is

james ha: My thought is that ball b would be pushed to an initial speed that's faster than the initial speed of free fall. Still starting from zero but pushed to a higher speed than free fall would initiate. Maybe what I'm talking about is the intial acceleration.

doug - i think i agree with

doug - i think i agree with you it was just that you said but not at a greater acceleration which made me think that since it's starting at 0 the acceleration would have to be greater wouldn't it? i am about to reach the end of my comprehension of laws of motion etc, and if we continue on about this my lack of smarts will become apparent. so, do you agree with janedoe's assessment of the NIST report? that's pretty much the defining issue, IMO.
__________--

The only way ball B could

The only way ball B could fall faster than freefall is if ball A is traveling faster than free fall and enough energy is transferred from ball A to ball B to achieve this.

If gravity is the only force in play on an object, maximum freefall speed (terminal speed) is the highest speed an object can obtain. Attach a rocket and maximum freefall speed can be surpassed.

Here's a site for trajectories, including free fall:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html

Here is a discussion about free fall and terminal velocity:

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00800.htm

When one factors in air resistance and the resistance of drywall, cubicles, office furniture, and of course STRUCTURAL STEEL, it would be impossible for the WTC buildings to fall as they did without the removal of said resistance. This, as physicist Steven Jones shows, was down with a combination of explosives and thermite that pulverized concrete and contents, and cut structural steel supports.

it would be impossible for

it would be impossible for the WTC buildings to fall as they did without the removal of said resistance.

and that, i do believe, is what janedoe has shown as well.
_____----

As to the question of the

As to the question of the audience size of Laura Ingram vs. Alan Colmes...

It is infinite. She has an audience. He has none.

It's hard to find exact numbers on her audience reach/share. But she's supposedly on 340 radio stations- so it could be in the millions. Alan Colmes' radio show is carried on Fox radio- which makes me think, given the conservative slant of their audience, he has a micro-audience.

She will be very antagonistic, unlike Colmes- and that means the stakes are considerably higher this time around. The difficulty for Dr. Fetzer in maintaining his composure and reasonability will be exponentially higher. But I think he seems to realize that, so here's to hoping things go well.

Doug '...still fall

Doug '...still fall considerably slower than the rate of free fall...'

Thanks!

back to the billiard balls

back to the billiard balls -
so mike, i gather from what you said that in order for ball b to accelerate faster than the norm, ball a would have to be flung at ball b and not merely dropped on ball b? if that is the case then there is no need for janedoe to make a new billiardball model as has been suggested, right?
__________---

james ha: I'm not

james ha: I'm not particularly knowlegable about this. I'm just trying to think about this logically. The second billiard ball, ball b, would be impacted by ball a after ball a had accelerated and whatever amount of energy was transfered would push the ball forward. One way to think about it is being pushed onto an escalator that is itself accelerating rather than starting from the beginning of the escalator.

At this point we really out to be doing calculations and I'm not really up to that. The question is how much energy would be transferred and wold the transfer of energy push ball b to a speed (not an acceleration) of more than 32 feet per second. The rate of acceleration is 32 feet per second per second.

james ha: Thinking about

james ha: Thinking about this some more it could be that the initial increase in acceleration is negligible overall and that it's best to think of the initial impact as an initiation of freefall rather than it's own accelerating force, but I don't really know.

As to the NIST report the really tricky thing about it is that it's 10,000 pages long. So even if you descredit some aspect of it you can always be accused of cherry picking. I mean I don't have time to read all 10,000 pages. I haven't heard a good explanation of the pulverized concrete. I'll say that much.

I'm not an expert but from

I'm not an expert but from what I've read, if object B is still (e.g. 0 mph) the only way it could fall faster than terminal velocity of gravity at any point in time is if object A hits it at such a high velocity that the energy transferred from A causes object B to exceed the terminal velocity achievable by gravitational pull.

This of course refers to billiard balls moving straight down through empty air.

In the instance of multiple objects, each object is going to resist and absorb the energy of those before it to some degree, and then things get more complicated with the computations of energy and resistance and conservation of momentum and balance of forces.

However, I think janedoe's stuff is pretty solid. The part about the debris falling slightly faster than the "collapse" point demonstrates how close to free fall speed these "collapses" occurred.

I wonder what Steven Jones thinks of this page?

This billiard thing was done

This billiard thing was done by Prof. Judy Wood of Clemson, she's a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. It's a featured article on their homepage (www.st911.org).

Judy Wood (FM)

Civil Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, Materials Engineering Science,
Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html

http://www.ces.clemson.edu/~woodj/

http://www.ces.clemson.edu/me/mefaculty/Wood.html

well mike and doug you are

well mike and doug you are both smarter than i, and as for this:
I wonder what Steven Jones thinks of this page?
no doubt he would find me to be a dummy, so before he sees this page and laughs, i will freely admit that i AM a dummy. - ha.

i think ms. doe's stuff is pretty solid also, and the fact that she invites e-mails is a sure sign of her confidence in her work.
__________---

"Feel free to "debunk" after

"Feel free to "debunk" after studying them, trolls."

It's funny that you and James Ha would admit in public that you are complete idiots and don't know that the "billiard ball" "theory" by woods has been completely debunked many times over.

You want us to believe that you are totally incapable of doing any research whatever and can only rely on what your 9/11 denier handlers feed you.

Tell us why you want us to believe you are idiots, bubba.

tom: I've read several

tom: I've read several different accounts debunking Judy Woods, but I'd be glad to see whatever information you have.

The main argument against Woods is that the accumulated mass would make the time it takes to pulverize the floors below negligible. There are a few problems with that account.

1. The mass doesn't appear to be accumulating as the floors are being reduced to dust.
2. The pulverization starts at the top.
3. The bottom of the towers are stronger and heavier than the top.

4. But if we're talking about Billiard balls only it might be worth testing to see if the accumulation of billiard balls would somehow act to make the collapse time equal to the time it would take for one billiard ball collapsing at free fall speeds.

Still, please do put up links to debunking websites.

tom will not pay attention

tom will not pay attention to anything that you say and probably doesn't have the foggiest idea what accumulating means. yet with a few simple posts of nonsense he has had entire threads full of commenters spinning their wheels just to refute that nonsense. he is the most blatant waste of time i have ever seen on the www.
_____----

anonymous: thank you for

anonymous: thank you for your response to my inquiry regarding Laura Ingrahams radio show ratings. I agree with your prediction/assesment of the upcoming program.

For those who missed my earlier post on the interview tomorrow (Friday) morning, here is the info posted on st911.org:

30 June 2006:
Interview: Jim Fetzer will be the guest discussing 9/11 with Laura Ingraham 9:30 AM/CT (10:30 AM/ET, 7:30 AM/PT)
http://www.lauraingraham.com/site

Tom seems to be a disinfo

Tom seems to be a disinfo agent. Probably one of Rumsfeld's new MI guys tasked to take the GWOT to the web, per his February speech to the CFR.

That's why I didn't spend too much time and effort on this. Ever hear that phrase "the devil's in the details"? That's what these moles do: they get you bogged down in minute details that obscure the obvious facts (e.g. WTC7, no fighter intercepts, foreknowledge, FBI moles, etc.). When we get into this minute detail, we're in the devil's playground.

The benefit of scientific charts, graphs, equations, etc. is to convince the super educated among us who require such things to see the truth.

As I've mentioned before

As I've mentioned before when it was posted, the billiard ball model needs to be fixed.

First off, the collapses didn't initiate at the top. This means floor 70-80, somewhere in there, is when you start the clock. It also means there is a greater force at the beginning of the collapse than there would be if it was just one floor collapsing (Force = mass x acceleration/gravity - bigger mass, bigger force).

Second, each floor is designed to hold 2-3 times the required weight of the floors above. The lower floors are effecting a greater force than the force of [mass of upper floors x gravity]. Once the collapse begins, the force becomes greater because the falling mass gets heavier as some portion of each floor piles on. I don't know the exact calculations, but some of that force is transferred to increase the initial speed of each floor, and some amount of that speed is also lost by the 2-3x force of the each floor's support.

Think about it this way: if you're rear-ended by a Ford Focus or a semi, which one do you think will push your car faster? Now imagine a single semi getting dropped on your house, or >30 semis stacked on top of each other falling on your house. Which one will collapse your house quicker? Is your roof just falling when it gets hit by the semi, or is it being impacted upon by a force?

I think what matters is the net force: the [force of falling mass - force of support resistance]. That is obviously greater near the end of the collapse than the beginning.

benthere, I have an idea.

benthere,

I have an idea. Why don't you read my paper. You'd be surprised what you'd find there. Go ahead and read it a few times. I have great confidence you'll figure it out! :-)

By the way, if you only consider the time it takes for the 70th floor to hit the ground, what do you do with the 110th floor? Do you count on a "sky hook" to hold the 110th floor up, indefinitely? ;-)

janedoe Thanks for your

janedoe

Thanks for your article. People seem to have the most difficulty with the section on momentum.

You say: "Block-A will stop moving momentarily [when it hits block B]". I need some clarification on this, if you can. I can imagine a very heavy block A having built up speed almost crashing through block B. Block A might slow, but stop, I'm not so sure..?? Any comments on this?

I've spoken to a few people and the only problems they have is with the momentum section of your article. I understand it's an idealised setting. but it seems to me it would be helpful if you could spend a litle more time discussing energy transfers, the conservation of energy and why the collapse appears as a physically bizarre process...there seems to be an enormous expenditure of energy in crushing the floors to dust. Am I right in saying that you interpret this to mean that the potential energy contained in the resting state of the building can be used maximally if we model a freefall situation without resistance (giving the fastest time collapse)? And that any dissipation of energy in materials destruction along the way can only have been at the price of a slower rate of collapse?

Have I got that right?

Cheers.