| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| WTC 7 kinks and drops just like a CD | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Sep 27 2009, 03:06 PM (803 Views) | |
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 03:06 PM Post #1 |
|
 Coincidence? |
 |
 
|
| midwestwally | Sep 27 2009, 03:26 PM Post #2 |
|
Fantastic video comparison, ToS! Kudos, man. And see how that very top, middle part — the "penthouse" it's been called — drops into the roof at the start? Dang. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Sep 27 2009, 03:29 PM Post #3 |
|
Yeah, that was one well overworked column 79. 
|
|
|
| Toriac | Sep 27 2009, 04:08 PM Post #4 |
|
If you drop a rock from a tree, or it falls off a branch on its own, does it look different coming down? How should a collapse look? Like a collapse |
|
|
|
| midwestwally | Sep 27 2009, 04:14 PM Post #5 |
|
Does the rock have to travel through tons of steel and concrete? Might look a little different. |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Sep 27 2009, 04:31 PM Post #6 |
|
ToS You don't suppose your clip of WTC 7 collapsing has been speeded up a tad ? The whole collapse sequence is less than even AE911T claim. Can you please give me the name of the other building ? I can't help wondering if the sound of inconvenient demolition explosions have been ommited. |
|
|
|
| midwestwally | Sep 27 2009, 04:39 PM Post #7 |
|
Nice presentation on WTC7 Engineer on WTC7 Tried to embed the video, but alas... next time! Edited by midwestwally, Sep 27 2009, 04:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Sep 27 2009, 04:56 PM Post #8 |
|
So just because it sounds different, it automatically isn't a controlled demolition? Even though every other aspect of the collapse resembles a controlled demolition? You're uneducated and unresearched on the topic of controlled demolition. Let me help you out: There are over 1000 different types of explosives that can be used for controlled demolitions. Blasters at Controlled Demolition, Inc. have stated that with the right type of explosives, timing, and delays, they can make the debris fall where ever they want, control sound, and control vibration. Just because it doesn't sound like a few of the controlled demolitions that you may have watched on the internet, doesn't mean it wasn't. Look at it:  For a building to fall straight down like above, every single support column has to be severed at the same exact time (timing). You can't do that with fire. That's why CD companies use explosives instead of fire. Nothing else needs to be said... |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Sep 27 2009, 05:10 PM Post #9 |
|
BoneZ The point about ToS's clip is that the comparison building is not identified and the sound has been erased. Here is a real CD, with sound, :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U4erFzhC-U and I would like to know the identity of ToS's comparative building so that I can try to trace the source and the sound that went with it. After all, that building didn't just up and fall to the ground. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Sep 27 2009, 05:11 PM Post #10 |
|
Since when have gif files had sound ? < I musta missed that meeting > Edit to add - Actually show me one clip of WTC7 coming down with sound. Edited by JFK, Sep 27 2009, 05:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 05:25 PM Post #11 |
|
Please show me another "non-CD" building collapse that collapses like a CD. |
|
|
|
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 05:27 PM Post #12 |
|
Answer my question first Alfie. Coincidence? |
|
|
|
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 05:27 PM Post #13 |
|
Snap! |
|
|
|
| tuatara | Sep 27 2009, 05:41 PM Post #14 |
|
I am still amazed that any "genuine" skeptic would not at least admit that WTC7 does look like a demolition. Add in the fact that 2 to 2.5 seconds of the collapse was at freefall, meaning there was no support at all in a building with random fires. Throw in news reports saying it had happened before it did, a first responder claiming he heard a countdown and all sorts of people knowing it was "coming down", and you must at least be just a tad suspicious? |
|
|
|
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 05:50 PM Post #15 |
|
Don't forget the minuscule amount of media coverage. That's the second biggest give-away that it's a CD, right behind the fact that it LOOKS just like a CD. |
|
|
|
| HeadLikeARock | Sep 27 2009, 05:52 PM Post #16 |
|
If you look at the high quality video of WTC7 collapsing on the NIST website, you can see the penthouse collapse inside the building well before the building starts to collapse (something like 6-7 seconds before). You can see what appears to be windows breaking on that part of the building just afterwards, which seems consistent with collapsing floors on that side of the building. The GIF being discussed doesn't show that part of the collapse. Does the full video of the other building collapsing also show a partial collapse from the roof inside the building several seconds prior to the global collapse? I suspect not as the penthouse area seems intact, but I'd like to see the whole video. When comparing videos like these, it doesn't make sense to ignore the differences while considering the similarities. The collapse of the WTC7 penthouse 6-7 seconds prior to the global collapse seems to be consistent with the NIST explanation, but IMO doesn't sit too well with the controlled demolition theory. |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Sep 27 2009, 06:10 PM Post #17 |
|
Tuatara Collapse of WTC 7 was expected from about 2pm. Here is a firefighter describing the situation :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HLDgjYuRHk&feature=player_embedded#t=14 That doesn't square with a controlled demolition to me. I am glad you mentioned the news media reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened. I just cannot understand why truthers keep going on about this. It seems to me to be an own goal. I suppose there are two alternatives. (a) on a day of terror and confusion some news outlets were fed incorrect information about the collapse of WTC 7, which had been expected for hours, or (b) the planners of this mass murder had fed the news media a script so that they would be fully abreast of developments. Does it not occur to suspicious truthers that (a) a script would be impossible because all timings were dependent on the unpredictable times of planes taking off and (b) would it not be insane for mass murderers to behave in this way . Surely this, along with Judy Wood and her beam weapons ; is a top priority to be junked if you want to begin to be taken seriously? |
|
|
|
| JFK | Sep 27 2009, 06:20 PM Post #18 |
|
And his name and fire company is ? The reason I ask is that firefighters at point that time were still in their turnout gear and this guy is not. |
|
|
|
| tuatara | Sep 27 2009, 06:28 PM Post #19 |
|
Missing the point again Alfie???? The suspicious part is that anyone would expect a collapse from a building fire yet alone announce it - after all we all know that fire cannot make buildings totally collapse, least of all fires which are only lit on certain floors. The fact is that it was announced on the media before it happened is bizarre - or do you want to "junk" that? I don't even understand your point about being taken seriously? Seriously about what? That it was announced on the BBC before it happened? Are you not at all suspicious Alfie? Freefall collapse Alfie? Found that official flightpath witness at the Pentagon yet Alfie? I suspect you just avoid the difficult questions ..... |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Sep 27 2009, 06:39 PM Post #20 |
|
JFK That firefighter is a familiar face on the internet. If he was unknown I feel pretty confident that someone in FDNY would have outed him by now. Have you got any evidence he is a government plant ? |
|
|
|
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 06:47 PM Post #21 |
|
bump for Alfie |
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Sep 27 2009, 06:47 PM Post #22 |
|
I guess while you purposely ignore all of the other evidence, how does the following video square? Kevin McPadden, 9/11-1st Responder: |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Sep 27 2009, 06:54 PM Post #23 |
|
Tuatara As the collapse of WTC 7 was anticipated for hours by FDNY I am not all surprised that it finally happened. The collapse was due to being struck by debris and fire. To make an issue of premature and mistaken reporting of it's collapse is. imho. insane. |
|
|
|
| tuatara | Sep 27 2009, 07:02 PM Post #24 |
|
So you are comfortable with random fires (that at no stage engulfed a significant part of a 47 story building) causing freefall collapse? Yes or No? |
|
|
|
| ToS | Sep 27 2009, 07:06 PM Post #25 |
|
bump again for Alfie |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic » |
2:30 PM Dec 4
