Collapse
Experiment
Ok,experiment is a basic element of modern science.In order to scientificaly prove a controlled demolition of WTC 1,2,7 we have to create a theory on the exact method,which was used to bring them down and than test it with (repetebale) experiment.
I (with large influence from achimspok's work) did a theory on the precollapse weakening and initiation of the (Twin Towers collapses).I've described it in my previous posts,but a little bit of recapitulation isn't gonna to do any damage.
So what caused the precollapse bowing of the exterior walls of WTC 1 and 2?Most probably thermite charges which were placed mainly at the 104th,105th and 106th floor.This charges attacked mainly the 1000 and 900 row core columns.(I'm not claiming that this was all,maybe there were other attacked points of the structure,but I'm absolutely sure only about these points)
Wanna prove?
- peterene's blog
- Read more
- Login to post comments
Emphasis on the Phone Calls
- peterene's blog
- Login to post comments
Astonishing fireballs,directed arson and insight in the preparator's mind.
Astonishing fireballs,directed arson and insight in the preparator's mind.
Note:
This is my third post here,it's part of my tetralogy on WTC 1 and 2 collapses,the first post http://911blogger.com/node/18972 tried explain why NIST failed to properly address the precollapse inward bowing,the second post http://911blogger.com/node/19036 describes what really lead to the inward bowing,and the third post will be about immediate seconds before and after the collapse initiations)
Let me start with this basic premise:
9/11 was an shock and awe campaign.Let me to guide you through possible thoughts of the World Trade Center demolition preparators and try to compare the outcome with reality.This time I will not offer you „hard physical“ evidence,I'll show you a logical frame.
Let's start with this amazing photo
- peterene's blog
- Read more
- Login to post comments
Damn You People Who Are Releasing These "Edited" Videos
Do you think this is some kind of joke or game? WTF is up with the videos being released with edits at "crucial" moments and sound being removed. The Bob and Bri vid and a couple other releases show this same pattern which leads many to suspect the vids are being fed into the system by nefarious forces.
Does a person actually think that by releasing a video as "anonymous" on a video upload site that they are actually hidden from the forces that carried out 9/11, or are they hiding from the public?
I call on anybody who has any video to stand up and show some God damn balls and release "UNEDITED" videos instead of this chopped up malarkey that has been choice fed to us. If you don't have the guts or the knowhow to upload, then send the damn thing to someone who does...
But for God's sake, for everyone's sake....quit with the games already!
- LUCUS's blog
- Login to post comments
High resolution release of new World Trade Center collapse videos
An anonymous source has released high resolution DVD mpg2 footage of the North Tower & Building 7 collapse clips, reported here on November 1st, 2008: http://www.911blogger.com/node/18358 Also the source has allowed the release of video of the South Tower, and made all 3 available in high quality downloadable DVD file mpg's. These files are cut from source recording DVD VOB files so there is no quality loss, however the sound has been removed, and the video is edited. The source wishes to remain anonymous at this point. View all 3 clips here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8lrTy5mrZY
Hi Quality DVD files at these links.
South Tower: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=67PMXROL
North Tower: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=YS0XHA8B
Let's sing this song loud and wake up more citizens around the world!
SEPTEMBER 11th WAS AN INSIDE JOB!
BTW, has anyone taped and uploaded the performance at the Now or Never event in NYC on 12th last month?
- Aus911Truth's blog
- Login to post comments
NIST WTC7 Report parody video
Do you work in a large office building? Then you should know about this recently discovered flaw in ALL EXISTING BUILDING CODES AND FIRE REGULATIONS that could cause the complete collapse of your office building. For more information on this phenonmenon, please email NIST at wtc@nist.gov
NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse
Source: http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html
NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse
Report and Recommendations for Improving Building Safety Released for Comment
August 21, 2008
CONTACT: Ben Stein, NIST
(301) 975-3097
ben.stein@nist.gov
Michael Newman , NIST
(301) 975-3025
mnewman@nist.gov
GAITHERSBURG, Md.—The fall of the 47-story World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) in New York City late in the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001, was primarily due to fires, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced today following an extensive, three-year scientific and technical building and fire safety investigation. This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building, the agency stated as it released for public comment its WTC investigation report and 13 recommendations for improving building and fire safety.
9/11and Probability Theory
Perth Citizens for Truth
http://9-11.meetup.com/332/files/
Article PDF at:
http://files.meetup.com/562554/911%20and%20Probability%20Theory.pdf
9/11 and Probability Theory
Frank M Legge (BSc, PhD)
10 June, 2008
Introduction
There have been a number of authors who have drawn attention to the improbability of certain reported events that led up to the disaster that has become known as 9/11, in which three major buildings at the World Trade Centre collapsed with heavy loss of life. Both Boolean algebra and probability theory have been invoked as a means of estimating the likelihood that the official explanation of the event as a whole can be relied upon. (1)
The official explanation for the building collapses may be distilled from the reports of the investigations carried out by three government bodies: FEMA, (2) NIST (3) and the 9/11 Commission. (4)
- mikezimmer's blog
- Read more
- Login to post comments
Was 10:45 a.m. the Originally Planned Demolition Time of WTC 7?
At 11:07 a.m. in the morning of September 11, 2001, a CNN correspondent in New York reported that a third tower had possibly collapsed. While this report was incorrect, it is interesting to note that the reporter's description could have applied to World Trade Center Building 7. This huge skyscraper was indeed the third tower to collapse on 9/11. However it did not come down until late in the afternoon, more than six hours after this report.
National Geographic Documentary Omits Building 7
"Inside 9/11" is an Emmy winning documentary made by the National Geographic Channel. The film goes through the events of 9/11 chronologically.
Even though the film itself is two hours long, it doesn't mention Building 7 even once, as you'll see in this video clip.
Direct link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCOVVl6e2Lc
The program doesn't bother to mention either the collapse or the building itself. Instead it skips straight from the North Tower collapse (10:30 AM) to 8:30 PM.
It seems just like the 9/11 Commission Report, Building 7 fails to turn up.
You can view the whole film below:
Direct link: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6666420467125611107
Uncut unedited raw 9/11/01 satellite feed WTC collapse video
Raw CBS news feed from September 11/01....no spinning graphics, flashy text, dramatic music or talking points. (Warning: some profanity can be heard.)
We need a comparative analysis between the WTC '93 bombing and the 2001 plane impacts
I have been spending the last few hours trying to come up with a way to compare the explosive forces between the '93 bomb and the plane impacts of 2001. However, my lack of expertise in this area of physics, pertaining to kinetic energy, explosive force, pressure, etc. is preventing me from making any sort of informed conclusion. On the other hand the information I have gathered suggests ( and I use that term lightly) that a bomb ( on the order of magnitude used in the '93 bombings: The bomb exploded in the underground garage at 12:17 P.M., generating a pressure estimated over one GPa (Giga Pascal) and opening a 30-meter-wide (98 foot) hole through four sublevels of concrete. The detonation velocity of this bomb was about 15,000 ft/s (4.5 km/s). Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_1993_bombings#Bomb_characteristics) planted in the sub-level basement (which houses the critical main support for the tower) had a much larger probability of collapsing the building than an impact of a 767 carrying 10,000 gallons of jet fuel nearly 1,000 feet up from the basement.
- The ICONOCLAST's blog
- Read more
- Login to post comments
Verisimilitude
Verisimilitude: 1 : having the appearance of truth : PROBABLE
2 : depicting realism (as in art or literature)
Here is my breakdown of what I hoped to do with this collection of films...
- TulsaTruth's blog
- Read more
- Login to post comments
Science in the Bush: When Politics Displaces Physics
Found this at ICH, I thought it was to good to be missing from 911-blogger ..
Original article HERE :
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18344.htm
Science in the Bush: When Politics Displaces Physics
By Dr. Crockett Grabbe and Lenny Charles
09/08/07 "ICH" -- -- The majority of us accept as fact that the current administration manipulates science for political ends. Few were surprised to hear experts from industry challenge overwhelming evidence of man-made climate change. Frustration within the scientific community had grown so much that by Dec. 2006 more than 10,000 scientists, including 52 Nobel laureates and 63 recipients of the National Medal of Science, had signed a statement accusing the Bush administration of "distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends".
Scientific integrity within the administration has often not been rewarded. Recently fired US surgeon general Richard Carmona said after leaving, "In public health, as in a democracy, there is nothing worse than ignoring science, or marginalizing the voice of science for reasons driven by changing political winds."
- Peter's blog
- Read more
- Login to post comments