+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 62 of 62

Thread: 9/11 third tower mystery 'solved'

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
    Yes, the pictures, video and explanation together DO lie. zg

    FROM
    Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?

    By Steven E. Jones
    Department of Physics and Astronomy
    Brigham Young University

    EXCERPT-
    14. The NIST team fairly admits that their report “does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached.” (NIST, 2005, p. 80, fn. 1; emphasis added.) Quite a confession, since much of the external evidence for explosive demolition typically comes after collapse initiation, as seen in cases of acknowledged controlled demolition. (Harris, 2000.)

    The rapid fall of the Towers and WTC7 has been analyzed by several engineers/scientists (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/proofs/speed.html; Griffin, 2004, chapter 2). The roof of WTC 7 (students and I are observing the southwest corner) falls to earth in less than 6.6 seconds, while an object dropped from the roof would hit the ground in 6.0 seconds. This follows from t = (2H/g)1/2. Likewise, the Towers fall very rapidly to the ground, with the upper part falling nearly as rapidly as ejected debris which provide free-fall references (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/proofs/speed.html; Griffin, 2004, chapter 2).

    Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum — one of the foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. If the central support columns remained standing, then the effective resistive mass would be less, but this is not the case — somehow the enormous support columns failed/disintegrated along with the falling floor pans.

    http://physics911.net/stevenjones
    Give it up, zg, or is it Mr. Smith.
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    856

    Default Lucky Larry

    "[Richard] Gage pointed out that for construction on the new Building 7 to begin in May of 2002, the official time frame -- which presupposes that 9/11 was a shocking and unforeseen event -- was highly improbable, even before [Larry] Silverstein's latest confession.

    "'“Let's just set aside the revelation, as damning as it is, if it's true, and we'll come to that. Let's just think in terms of the incredible disaster that happened on 9/11, how the entire country was in shock, and how almost everything was put to a standstill. Particularly in New York, and particularly at the site of the World Trade Center. Imagine, after these three buildings come down -- and of course the media didn't even tell the engineering and architectural community about the third tower (WTC-7) at all, since it wasn't played on TV, most architects and engineers know nothing about it.

    "'But you've got three months after 9/11, let's just give it three months, to even begin to come out of the ashes, and the state of emotional devastation, to even begin to select a designer for a new building. And then construction begins six months after that!

    "'So figure, they're not even going to select a designer for three months. Or if they are, it's going to take three months to find one. So … if in January 2002 they began the actual design process and engineering process of a 50-story skyscraper like the new Building 7, it would take a year or more, probably two years -- especially at that site, and especially over the top of a new Con Edison electrical substation. Which this new WTC-7 is built over the top of, just like the old WTC-7 that went down.

    "'We've got construction starting in June (or May, according to Wikipedia -ed.) of 2002. They could not have started design until January 2002 under normal circumstances. That's a six month design process! So we have a huge problem with the sequence of events here, even without Larry's startling admission that their first design meeting was in April of 2000. Which is more likely to be true!'"

    Read the full article at: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/03/18/ae911-larry/

    Related article: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/03...mbshell-larry/

    Related thread; http://www.zenzoneforum.com/threads/...t-Down-By-Fire

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. "Mystery Solved" - WTC-7 Brought Down By Fire
    By zengrifter in forum Conspiracy Theory
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: March 31st, 2016, 09:54 AM
  2. LQQK! Photo Analysis: No Plane Hit 2nd Tower
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: October 30th, 2011, 06:46 PM
  3. Inflatable tower could climb to the edge of space
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 16th, 2009, 01:41 AM
  4. Race Horse Mystery Solved (partially)
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 23rd, 2008, 04:15 PM
  5. Physicists have 'solved' mystery of levitation
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 8th, 2007, 09:46 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts