Sorry Charlie,
I have lost the references I have to the side-toppled buildings I speak
of, but will relay them as they turn up. Some of the same ones
appeared in the threads when we first dove into this some months ago,
if that helps.
Ok, let's get into the science a bit more.
This event triggered a number of memories for me as I was almost out of
High School when nearby Mt St Helens blew. Watching the turbulent
cloud motions of WTC has been gnawing at my hind-brain for some time.
I'd not made the connection until I saw this piece. He nails it.
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/09/pyroclastic-flows
-911s-smoking-gun_13.html 22 minutes in length
This piece of video compares pyroclastic flows & a good use of layered
data to see various interactions, physical simulations and the times
they occurred. This example relies on basic newtonian principles to
question the secondary plumes and arcing debris that is seen RISING and
ARCING away from the building AFTER initial shock-waves and debris
fields HAVE PASSED in the collapse wave - what causes material to
exhibit a cannonball trajectory except explosive action? It helps
explain why debris was found farther than expected from the central
core, although I'm still searching for more factoids.
As a paraglider one learns to gauge the elements in a highly tuned way
and in a funny accident of fate I've even launched off Mt St Helens.
Riding thermal updrafts is essential to staying up longer than a few
minutes in the air. Something was making powerfully clear thermals to
my trained eye {simply put your maimed or die if you don't learn these
tricks when flying} and even laymen can appreciate the force we see
once it's pointed out. It also examines the heated dust columns with
some notations under the clip to quantify the needed heat to move these
particles. This motion we see in the central dust/smoke plume bespeaks
of an intense heat source driving everything straight up on a clear
day. I'd like to know if the kinetic release of heat caused by this
mass impacting the ground is anywhere near hot enough to exhibit this.
I doubt it.
Additionally, I refused to watch the agitprop "Paths to 9-11"
dreck-u-mentary on ABC, but instead watched Robert De Niro host a CBS
viewing of a documentary made by the two French brothers, Gedeon &
Jules Naudet, who were filming a rookie firemen's journey at the
closest WTC firehouse that morning. They caught the footage of that
very first plane striking and have come up with an amazingly touching
film. In this film you see the only footage of the interior lobbies
known and at one point we see the elevators finally disgorge hapless
worried riders trapped when event began. This flies in the face of the
'aux-current' official story that lobby destruction was caused by jet
fuel "somehow" coursing all the way down from above through those
shafts to blow marble facades off the walls to explain why firemen
witness burned & broken people in the lobby when they arrived. These
are not the jumpers who come later in horrifying audio crashes. I
never understood how this burning fuel traveling down suddenly turns
into an explosive mechanism only towards the bottom {there were several
more extra large floors below street level} in this fable and now I
feel it is debunked. I've mentioned before those same burned & dazed
people have born witness that something exploded out of the basement.
It was those same firemen's testimony about a series of explosions
"just like a demolition" bringing the buildings down that got me off my
ass to investigate the discomfort I had with the official story{s}.
BTW - I'm done with ABC.
I've V-chipped ABC, ABC family, Disney, Lifetime, A&E, E!, and ESPN
right out off our household and I haven't missed anything yet. My wife
may want to tweak my list but my son will never watch Disney's
Fantasyland {in more ways than one} again and I refuse to purchase
their Pixar DVD's for him. Nyet. Nada. No way. I suggest if your
offended by their blatant coddling to this administration while only
critical of the Clinton-era, then it's time to lance the boil. It's
worse than Fahrenheit 911 because there you knew where the POV of the
director was facing, here they insist it's factual in the face of 9-11
Commission reports, etc.
And tell them, tell them all, as well as the "it wasn't us" ABC News
team of your feelings if you hope to have any near-term effect on their
craven conduct.
- Jonathan -
On Sep 15, 2006, at 2:08 PM, Charlie Bell wrote:
On 15/09/2006, at 11:52 PM, Gibson Jonathan wrote:
Charlie,
You've turned the whole thing in it's head. Your asking me to prove
support for your position that the official story, du jour, holds
true.
No, I'm asking you for evidence to support your claim that it doesn't.
"The point we are all scratching our heads over is how they didn't
topple off to one side. None of these buildings {though WTC7 was a
shorter one} acted as any other building has. Ever."
That's what you said. Back it up with evidence of other buildings of
the same type acting differently, and I'll go "Hmm. Interesting" and
we have a conversation about why. As it is, you're making an
unsubstantiated assertion, and asking others to disprove it. No,
that's not how science works.
"Where's your examples that prove your assumptions?"
I don't have assumptions. I'm just reasonably happy that the
explanations I've heard fit the evidence I've seen. If you're
challenging those, then you provide evidence to support that. As I
said:
"Good assertion. So let's see the evidence. Show us please a case
study of a building collapse *of this construction type* that has
toppled further than half its width in a progressive collapse. If you
can show us one that has acted another way, then we have a comparison
line."
I'm not dismissing you and I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm interested
in your view. But I need you to back up your assertion with a bit of
evidence. It's a simple request.
Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Jonathan Gibson
www.formandfunction.com/word
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
