| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Schoenfeld" |
| Date: |
09 Aug 2006 09:52:28 AM |
| Object: |
The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics destroys
the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these physics
elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
themselves, freefall through concrete?
Well the evidence clearly suggests that the vast majority of these
people are the most ignorant in the society. As bizzare as that sounds,
think about that for some time, and you may realize why things are
structured in the way they are and why such people act in the way they
act. It's a pyramid of elitism, a pyramid of ignorance, a pyramid of
deception.
The problem is not that, though. The problem is that they deceive the
masses into giving them the presumption of competence and ultimately
authority over the dissemination of knowledge. As a result, the masses
walk into education systems to get taught "look how smart I, the
vanity-filled instructor, am" and walk right out thinking "math is
hard" and "I'm no genius like them so I have no chance". In reality all
the pyramid has done is obfuscated and complicated the otherwise
simple, child-like laws of nature. Through the elaborate symbology and
vanity-priority 'nomenclature' the pyramid of elitism constructs the
mind prisons that enslave the masses with their own ignorance. For the
pyramid seeks not to educate in the interest of objective progress, but
rather to subdue in the pursuit of the vanity of its elite, and the
acquisition of their immediate pleasures.
Such is the degree of this deception that in todays Orwellian world,
the ordinary individual can see a building FREEFALL INTO ITSELF and not
even realize it, not even question it, for whatever the pyramid said it
was means more than anything physical, tangible evidence could ever
say...
George Orwell was right, 2 + 2 really does equal 5.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
.
|
|
| User: "John P." |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 12:43:41 AM |
|
|
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics destroys
the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these physics
elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
themselves, freefall through concrete?
The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC buildings
fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds for the
towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates the towers
fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?
Is it just some *need* for alternate conspiracy theorists to believe their
own 'facts' true?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 02:39:44 AM |
|
|
John P. wrote:
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics destroys
the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these physics
elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
themselves, freefall through concrete?
The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC buildings
fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds for the
towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates the towers
fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?
Because people can use a clock, they can count seconds, and they can
see for their own eyes.
Is it just some *need* for alternate conspiracy theorists to believe their
own 'facts' true?
The need is to account for the evidence. Either Galileo was wrong or
WTC 1,2 & 7 were brought down by controlled demolition.
If H is the average floor-height and N is the total number of floors
inthe building, then the optimal collapse solution for the pancake
model is N separate freefalls each of height H.
The video evidence clearly shows 1 freefall of height N*H for each
building.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 05:04:24 AM |
|
|
"Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155195584.802701.286290@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
|
| John P. wrote:
| > "Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
| >
| > > Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
| > > groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
| > > gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
| > > that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics
destroys
| > > the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these
physics
| > > elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
| > > themselves, freefall through concrete?
| >
| > The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC
buildings
| > fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds for the
| > towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates the towers
| > fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?
|
| Because people can use a clock, they can count seconds, and they can
| see for their own eyes.
And when they do, Galileo is proven correct. What is your point?
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John P." |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 03:22:40 AM |
|
|
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC
buildings
fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds for the
towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates the towers
fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?
Because people can use a clock, they can count seconds, and they can
see for their own eyes.
There is some incogruity there. If one can use a clock and see, then one
cannot come up with 9.5 seconds for either tower or 6.5 for WTC 7.
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv
In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera
operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. It is
still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the
collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of 14-15
seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5 seconds?
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=911NewsReport.flv
In this video, you can see the initiation of the WTC 7 collapse - the
mechanical penthouse on the left, collapsing through the roof. For 6
seconds, you cannot see what is happening, then you can see the reminder of
the collapse. You get a total collapse time of right at 13 seconds. How
would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 6.5 seconds?
The need is to account for the evidence. Either Galileo was wrong or
Galileo did fine. Perhaps he just had a better watch than most alternate
conspiracy theorists have?
WTC 1,2 & 7 were brought down by controlled demolition.
WTC 1 & 2 were brought down by a combination of fuel laden 767's crashing
into them and the resulting fires. The evidence and facts allow anyone to
arrive at that conclusion. There is no evidence and are no facts to support
any of the alternate theories - they are based on false information, some
times doctored evidence, misinterpretation of evidence, bad guesses, bad
science, or just wishful thinking.
WTC 7 was brought down by the same thing that brought down 24 other
buildings in the area around the WTC towers - the collapsing towers. How
could anyone not grasp how 1 out of 25 buildings collapsed while at the same
time readily understanding how the other 24 were damaged or destroyed by the
collapsing towers?
The building was heavily damaged and had extensive fires. There is no
evidence that allows one to arrive at any conclusion other than the damage
and the fires causing the collapse.
If H is the average floor-height and N is the total number of floors
inthe building, then the optimal collapse solution for the pancake
model is N separate freefalls each of height H.
The video evidence clearly shows 1 freefall of height N*H for each
building.
It clearly doesn't. The buildings were not designed to handle the huge
dynamic loads placed on the structure once the collapse initiate. There are
no structural engineers that see anything suspicious or wrong about the way
they collapse or the amount of time it took for them to collapse. Les
Robertson was *surprised* (and thankful) that they stood as long as they
did.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 05:10:44 AM |
|
|
John P. wrote:
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC
buildings
fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds for the
towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates the towers
fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?
Because people can use a clock, they can count seconds, and they can
see for their own eyes.
There is some incogruity there. If one can use a clock and see, then one
cannot come up with 9.5 seconds for either tower or 6.5 for WTC 7.
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv
In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera
operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. It is
still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the
collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of 14-15
seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5 seconds?
Even the 9/11 Omission Report claims a figure of 10 seconds. You are
operating under some notion that +/- 2 seconds from vacuum freefall
saves the official account. Freefall includes some wind resistance,
which is what is always observed in controlled demolitions. Roughly,
the resistance for the towers should've been perhaps a second or two,
maybe half a second for WTC 7. On the other hand, in order to save your
official theory, the resistance from all that concrete and steal beams
had to be the same as air.
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=911NewsReport.flv
In this video, you can see the initiation of the WTC 7 collapse - the
mechanical penthouse on the left, collapsing through the roof. For 6
seconds, you cannot see what is happening, then you can see the reminder of
the collapse. You get a total collapse time of right at 13 seconds. How
would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 6.5 seconds?
There is no 'remainder of the collapse'. It takes 6 seconds for the
towers to collapse from start to finish - the video clearly shows that.
You must be confusing the smoke as some sort of indicator that it 'is
still collapsing'.
The need is to account for the evidence. Either Galileo was wrong or
Galileo did fine. Perhaps he just had a better watch than most alternate
conspiracy theorists have?
WTC 1,2 & 7 were brought down by controlled demolition.
WTC 1 & 2 were brought down by a combination of fuel laden 767's crashing
into them and the resulting fires. The evidence and facts allow anyone to
arrive at that conclusion. There is no evidence and are no facts to support
any of the alternate theories - they are based on false information, some
times doctored evidence, misinterpretation of evidence, bad guesses, bad
science, or just wishful thinking.
WTC 7 was brought down by the same thing that brought down 24 other
buildings in the area around the WTC towers - the collapsing towers.
Ha Ha Ha.. good one.. 24 other buildings collapsed just like wtc 7 all
caused because of the twin towers.. nice way to spin it...
How
could anyone not grasp how 1 out of 25 buildings collapsed while at the same
time readily understanding how the other 24 were damaged or destroyed by the
collapsing towers?
The building was heavily damaged and had extensive fires. There is no
evidence that allows one to arrive at any conclusion other than the damage
and the fires causing the collapse.
If H is the average floor-height and N is the total number of floors
inthe building, then the optimal collapse solution for the pancake
model is N separate freefalls each of height H.
The video evidence clearly shows 1 freefall of height N*H for each
building.
It clearly doesn't. The buildings were not designed to handle the huge
dynamic loads placed on the structure once the collapse initiate. There are
no structural engineers that see anything suspicious or wrong about the way
they collapse or the amount of time it took for them to collapse. Les
Robertson was *surprised* (and thankful) that they stood as long as they
did.
www.st911.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P." |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 09:15:16 PM |
|
|
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv
In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera
operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. It
is
still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the
collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of
14-15
seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5
seconds?
Even the 9/11 Omission Report claims a figure of 10 seconds. You are
operating under some notion that +/- 2 seconds from vacuum freefall
saves the official account.
That's an excellent observation. ... but wrong. I am unconcerned with the
9/11 commission report. I am looking at a video in which the tower has not
yet completely collapsed at the 12 second mark. I suggest that one would
have a very hard time believing that this tower somehow fell in 9.5 seconds,
while seeing a portion of it still standing, and the collapse continuing, at
the 12 seconds.
Freefall includes some wind resistance, which is what is
always observed in controlled demolitions. Roughly,
the resistance for the towers should've been perhaps a second or two,
maybe half a second for WTC 7. On the other hand, in order to save your
official theory, the resistance from all that concrete and steal beams
had to be the same as air.
Did it? I'd appreciate any links or references you could provide that would
help me to understand this. Of the information I have read from engineers to
date, the buildings did not fall at freefall speed and there was nothing
suspicious about the speed or manner in which they collapse.
Much of the information I have read from engineers on this topic, points out
rather quickly that the WTC towers *were* mostly air.
You should note that large pieces of wreckage,which *would* be falling at
freefall speed, fall faster than the building is collapsing. (they get ahead
of the collapse). Obviously, if the building were falling at freefall speed,
this would not be observed.
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=911NewsReport.flv
In this video, you can see the initiation of the WTC 7 collapse - the
mechanical penthouse on the left, collapsing through the roof. For 6
seconds, you cannot see what is happening, then you can see the reminder
of
the collapse. You get a total collapse time of right at 13 seconds. How
would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 6.5 seconds?
There is no 'remainder of the collapse'. It takes 6 seconds for the
towers to collapse from start to finish - the video clearly shows that.
You must be confusing the smoke as some sort of indicator that it 'is
still collapsing'.
Nope. If there was no remainder of the collapse, the building would still be
standing. The collapse initiates with the mechanical penthouse falling into
the building (indicating a failure of the structure below the mechanical
penthouse).
Here's how you can see this for yourself. Watch the video again. The image
of WTC 7 comes in around 57 seconds - "Now here we're going to show you..."
Look at the top left of the building - on the roof. The mechanical penthouse
is still there.
At 1:02, you see the mechanical penthouse collapse into the building - "Now
we go to video tape..."
You have just witnessed the initiation of the collapse at time 1:02.
From about 1:05 until 1:10, you cannot see anything happening in the video.
Something might be happening (such as the mechanical penthouse crashing down
through each floor all the way to the basement), or, maybe nothing is
happening (the penthouse dropped one floor and stopped).
The last time we can see any of the building is at 1:15.
Starts at 1:02, ends at 1:15 - that's 13 seconds, no matter how you slice
it.
WTC 1 & 2 were brought down by a combination of fuel laden 767's crashing
into them and the resulting fires. The evidence and facts allow anyone to
arrive at that conclusion. There is no evidence and are no facts to
support
any of the alternate theories - they are based on false information, some
times doctored evidence, misinterpretation of evidence, bad guesses, bad
science, or just wishful thinking.
WTC 7 was brought down by the same thing that brought down 24 other
buildings in the area around the WTC towers - the collapsing towers.
Ha Ha Ha.. good one.. 24 other buildings collapsed just like wtc 7 all
caused because of the twin towers.. nice way to spin it...
Spin? Are you denying that these buildings were damaged or destroyed on
9/11? What happened to them? What caused their damage or destruction?
It clearly doesn't. The buildings were not designed to handle the huge
dynamic loads placed on the structure once the collapse initiate. There
are
no structural engineers that see anything suspicious or wrong about the
way
they collapse or the amount of time it took for them to collapse. Les
Robertson was *surprised* (and thankful) that they stood as long as they
did.
www.st911.org
The Clowns for Truth site was funny the first time or two I read it... but,
the jokes are old and stale now.
Which of their jokes do you like the best?
Hijackers are still alive?
The flight 93 CVR picking up passenger conversations? (Scholars can't read a
transcript?)
Christie Whitman telling workers at ground zero that it was OK to breathe
the dust?
One of my favorites was always from Prof. Jones - the king clown - He claims
to have talked to a demolitions expert who has used controlled demolition to
bring down hundreds of buildings just like the WTC towers.
That's pretty amazing considering that the tallest steel framed structure
brought down by controlled demolition to date is only 27 stories and
designed nothing at all like the WTC towers. Prof. Jones should have checked
this guy's credentials a little better.
Then again, Alex Jones is pretty funny - he claims that in the Madrid Tower
fire, *none* of the steel beams were damaged or "even weakened"! LOL! I
guess he missed the part where the steel structure *collapsed* to the 17
floor, because of the fires.
He also came up with this one - WTC 7 had *no* damage from the WTC tower
collapsing on it other than a few broken windows, some dust and small fires!
Alex must have an inability to view pictures or videos.
The Clowns for Truth also came up with this whopper - The invisible
government had every bomber and SSBN on station and every US nuke ready to
launch, including all codes being input. 'They' told President Bush that if
he didn't go along with their 19 Arab hijackers story, they would launch
these nukes to start a global nuclear war!
Amazing - not a single enlisted guy has felt he should mention this to
anyone. ... but they posted pictures of prisoners in Iraq.
If you buy into these nutjob stories, you need serious help.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 12:13:36 AM |
|
|
John P. wrote:
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv
In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera
operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. It
is
still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the
collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of
14-15
seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5
seconds?
Even the 9/11 Omission Report claims a figure of 10 seconds. You are
operating under some notion that +/- 2 seconds from vacuum freefall
saves the official account.
That's an excellent observation. ... but wrong. I am unconcerned with the
9/11 commission report. I am looking at a video in which the tower has not
yet completely collapsed at the 12 second mark. I suggest that one would
have a very hard time believing that this tower somehow fell in 9.5 seconds,
while seeing a portion of it still standing, and the collapse continuing, at
the 12 seconds.
You're right, the the north tower did not collapse in the 6 seconds
'conspiracy theorists' claim WTC 7 collapsed in.. I never thought of it
in that way, thanks for clarifying that up, Goldstein...
Freefall includes some wind resistance, which is what is
always observed in controlled demolitions. Roughly,
the resistance for the towers should've been perhaps a second or two,
maybe half a second for WTC 7. On the other hand, in order to save your
official theory, the resistance from all that concrete and steal beams
had to be the same as air.
Did it? I'd appreciate any links or references you could provide that would
help me to understand this. Of the information I have read from engineers to
date, the buildings did not fall at freefall speed and there was nothing
suspicious about the speed or manner in which they collapse.
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
Much of the information I have read from engineers on this topic, points out
rather quickly that the WTC towers *were* mostly air.
You should note that large pieces of wreckage,which *would* be falling at
freefall speed, fall faster than the building is collapsing. (they get ahead
of the collapse). Obviously, if the building were falling at freefall speed,
this would not be observed.
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=911NewsReport.flv
In this video, you can see the initiation of the WTC 7 collapse - the
mechanical penthouse on the left, collapsing through the roof. For 6
seconds, you cannot see what is happening, then you can see the reminder
of
the collapse. You get a total collapse time of right at 13 seconds. How
would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 6.5 seconds?
There is no 'remainder of the collapse'. It takes 6 seconds for the
towers to collapse from start to finish - the video clearly shows that.
You must be confusing the smoke as some sort of indicator that it 'is
still collapsing'.
Nope. If there was no remainder of the collapse, the building would still be
standing. The collapse initiates with the mechanical penthouse falling into
the building (indicating a failure of the structure below the mechanical
penthouse).
Here's how you can see this for yourself. Watch the video again. The image
of WTC 7 comes in around 57 seconds - "Now here we're going to show you..."
Look at the top left of the building - on the roof. The mechanical penthouse
is still there.
At 1:02, you see the mechanical penthouse collapse into the building - "Now
we go to video tape..."
You have just witnessed the initiation of the collapse at time 1:02.
From about 1:05 until 1:10, you cannot see anything happening in the video.
Something might be happening (such as the mechanical penthouse crashing down
through each floor all the way to the basement), or, maybe nothing is
happening (the penthouse dropped one floor and stopped).
The last time we can see any of the building is at 1:15.
Starts at 1:02, ends at 1:15 - that's 13 seconds, no matter how you slice
it.
WTC 1 & 2 were brought down by a combination of fuel laden 767's crashing
into them and the resulting fires. The evidence and facts allow anyone to
arrive at that conclusion. There is no evidence and are no facts to
support
any of the alternate theories - they are based on false information, some
times doctored evidence, misinterpretation of evidence, bad guesses, bad
science, or just wishful thinking.
WTC 7 was brought down by the same thing that brought down 24 other
buildings in the area around the WTC towers - the collapsing towers.
Ha Ha Ha.. good one.. 24 other buildings collapsed just like wtc 7 all
caused because of the twin towers.. nice way to spin it...
Spin? Are you denying that these buildings were damaged or destroyed on
9/11? What happened to them? What caused their damage or destruction?
It clearly doesn't. The buildings were not designed to handle the huge
dynamic loads placed on the structure once the collapse initiate. There
are
no structural engineers that see anything suspicious or wrong about the
way
they collapse or the amount of time it took for them to collapse. Les
Robertson was *surprised* (and thankful) that they stood as long as they
did.
www.st911.org
The Clowns for Truth site was funny the first time or two I read it... but,
the jokes are old and stale now.
Which of their jokes do you like the best?
Hijackers are still alive?
The flight 93 CVR picking up passenger conversations? (Scholars can't read a
transcript?)
Christie Whitman telling workers at ground zero that it was OK to breathe
the dust?
One of my favorites was always from Prof. Jones - the king clown - He claims
to have talked to a demolitions expert who has used controlled demolition to
bring down hundreds of buildings just like the WTC towers.
That's pretty amazing considering that the tallest steel framed structure
brought down by controlled demolition to date is only 27 stories and
designed nothing at all like the WTC towers. Prof. Jones should have checked
this guy's credentials a little better.
Then again, Alex Jones is pretty funny - he claims that in the Madrid Tower
fire, *none* of the steel beams were damaged or "even weakened"! LOL! I
guess he missed the part where the steel structure *collapsed* to the 17
floor, because of the fires.
He also came up with this one - WTC 7 had *no* damage from the WTC tower
collapsing on it other than a few broken windows, some dust and small fires!
Alex must have an inability to view pictures or videos.
The Clowns for Truth also came up with this whopper - The invisible
government had every bomber and SSBN on station and every US nuke ready to
launch, including all codes being input. 'They' told President Bush that if
he didn't go along with their 19 Arab hijackers story, they would launch
these nukes to start a global nuclear war!
Amazing - not a single enlisted guy has felt he should mention this to
anyone. ... but they posted pictures of prisoners in Iraq.
If you buy into these nutjob stories, you need serious help.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P." |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 02:16:53 AM |
|
|
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
That's an excellent observation. ... but wrong. I am unconcerned with the
9/11 commission report. I am looking at a video in which the tower has
not
yet completely collapsed at the 12 second mark. I suggest that one would
have a very hard time believing that this tower somehow fell in 9.5
seconds,
while seeing a portion of it still standing, and the collapse continuing,
at
the 12 seconds.
You're right, the the north tower did not collapse in the 6 seconds
'conspiracy theorists' claim WTC 7 collapsed in.. I never thought of it
in that way, thanks for clarifying that up, Goldstein...
Or the 9.5 I listed in the above paragraph. Are you dyslexic or just
illiterate?
Freefall includes some wind resistance, which is what is
always observed in controlled demolitions. Roughly,
the resistance for the towers should've been perhaps a second or two,
maybe half a second for WTC 7. On the other hand, in order to save your
official theory, the resistance from all that concrete and steal beams
had to be the same as air.
Did it? I'd appreciate any links or references you could provide that
would
help me to understand this. Of the information I have read from engineers
to
date, the buildings did not fall at freefall speed and there was nothing
suspicious about the speed or manner in which they collapse.
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
Looks like illiterate wins, eh? Can you find "NIST", "FEMA" or "government"
in my above comment?
Your inability to respond to any of the facts present, or to provide
counterarguments or evidence is noted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 03:30:44 AM |
|
|
John P. wrote:
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
That's an excellent observation. ... but wrong. I am unconcerned with the
9/11 commission report. I am looking at a video in which the tower has
not
yet completely collapsed at the 12 second mark. I suggest that one would
have a very hard time believing that this tower somehow fell in 9.5
seconds,
while seeing a portion of it still standing, and the collapse continuing,
at
the 12 seconds.
You're right, the the north tower did not collapse in the 6 seconds
'conspiracy theorists' claim WTC 7 collapsed in.. I never thought of it
in that way, thanks for clarifying that up, Goldstein...
Or the 9.5 I listed in the above paragraph. Are you dyslexic or just
illiterate?
The South tower collapsed in 9.5 seconds is the contention of those who
populate reality, the south tower. You are showing video of the North
tower.
Did it? I'd appreciate any links or references you could provide that
would
help me to understand this. Of the information I have read from engineers
to
date, the buildings did not fall at freefall speed and there was nothing
suspicious about the speed or manner in which they collapse.
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
Looks like illiterate wins, eh? Can you find "NIST", "FEMA" or "government"
in my above comment?
NIST admit they cannot account for WTC 7, FEMA does not even mention
it. 9/11 Commission report does not mention WTC 7. Your mind cannot
comphrehend reality.
Your inability to respond to any of the facts present, or to provide
counterarguments or evidence is noted.
How is it possible to respond to someone who says that WTC 7 did not
collapse in 6 seconds when the video clearly shows that it collapsed in
6 seconds?Why are you showing video of the North tower?
Given that all indicators show a new government-sponsored 9/11 attack
is on the verge of execution, wasting time arguing with you is
dangerous waste of time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P." |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 02:31:08 PM |
|
|
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
You're right, the the north tower did not collapse in the 6 seconds
'conspiracy theorists' claim WTC 7 collapsed in.. I never thought of it
in that way, thanks for clarifying that up, Goldstein...
Or the 9.5 I listed in the above paragraph. Are you dyslexic or just
illiterate?
The South tower collapsed in 9.5 seconds is the contention of those who
populate reality, the south tower. You are showing video of the North
tower.
Do I need to type slower for you or something? It is said, by alternate
conspiracy theorists, that WTC 1, 2 and 7 fell at freefall speed. Freefall
speed for the towers would be 9.5 seconds (actually, 9.22), for WTC 7, it
would be 6.5 seconds. If you see a video that clearly shows the North tower
fell in excess of 12 seconds. Collapse videos of the South tower show it
also fell in excess of 12 seconds. Collapse videos of WTC 7, that show the
entire collapse (most alternate conspiracy sites only show the last 7
seconds of it), show that building took at least 13 seconds to collapse as
well.
Therefore, alternate conspiracy theorists who claim the buildings fell at
freefall speeds are wrong. They need to ignore readily available evidence to
make such claims.
NIST admit they cannot account for WTC 7...
Actually, NIST has not yet released their report on WTC 7 (although they
said they would do so by July 2005 - over a year ago)
... FEMA does not even mention it. 9/11 Commission
report does not mention WTC 7. Your mind cannot
comphrehend reality.
No... it's true. I cannot comprehend your reality. There is plenty of
information available, including FDNY statements, that make it clear *why*
WTC 7 collapsed. As to the exact mechanism... you are correct, no on to date
has provided such details. Given that there is zero evidence to suggest WTC
7 collapsed for some other reason, why would one even bother looking?
Your inability to respond to any of the facts present, or to provide
counterarguments or evidence is noted.
How is it possible to respond to someone who says that WTC 7 did not
collapse in 6 seconds when the video clearly shows that it collapsed in
6 seconds?
Yes... a 6 second video would tend to make it appear so. If you look at the
entire collapse, you cannot come up with 6 seconds inless you intentionally
ignore watching all but the last 6 seconds of the collapse.
Why are you showing video of the North tower?
To show that it did not collapse in 9.5 seconds.
Given that all indicators show a new government-sponsored 9/11 attack
is on the verge of execution, wasting time arguing with you is
dangerous waste of time.
Uh oh.... UFO's hovering around your window again? Are you hiding under the
bed as you type this? Have you built a bunker in the back yard and stocked
it with 10 years of freeze dried food?
Shhhh.... there goes a black helicopter!
AAAAAHHHHHHH
HHHHHHH
HHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHHH!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 10:10:11 AM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2006 22:13:36 -0700, "Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com>
wrote:
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 10:54:03 AM |
|
|
wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 22:13:36 -0700, "Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com>
wrote:
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf
That document was released by NIST last year in response to growing
army of skeptics who have called out the gov on this obvious inside
job. Funnily though, that document does not account for the physics of
the collapse at all, and NIST even state that that model has a "low
probability of occurance". FEMA does not mention WTC 7, the 9/11
Omission report does not mention it either, and you simply refuse to
acknowledge reality.
I urge you though to continue to live in your delusional hole as you
are fully deserving of the fate your betters have in store for you..
.
|
|
|
| User: "BDK" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 12:14:20 PM |
|
|
In article <1155398043.819707.274690@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
schoenfeld1@gmail.com says...
agent86@justicespammail.com wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 22:13:36 -0700, "Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com>
wrote:
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf
That document was released by NIST last year in response to growing
army of skeptics who have called out the gov on this obvious inside
job. Funnily though, that document does not account for the physics of
the collapse at all, and NIST even state that that model has a "low
probability of occurance". FEMA does not mention WTC 7, the 9/11
Omission report does not mention it either, and you simply refuse to
acknowledge reality.
I urge you though to continue to live in your delusional hole as you
are fully deserving of the fate your betters have in store for you..
Nice kookrant. You're fully deserving of the commitment your relatives
have in store for you..
You know that they work for the CIA, right??
LOL, you poor pitiful kook *****...
BDK
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
13 Aug 2006 02:04:43 PM |
|
|
On 12 Aug 2006 08:54:03 -0700, "Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com>
wrote:
agent86@justicespammail.com wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 22:13:36 -0700, "Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com>
wrote:
There is virtually no information from NIST/FEMA/government on WTC 7.
You are demonstrably a liar.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf
That document was released by NIST last year in response to growing
army of skeptics who have called out the gov on this obvious inside
job.
Yet you just said that there was "virtually no information from NIST".
Funnily though, that document does not account for the physics of
the collapse at all, and NIST even state that that model has a "low
probability of occurance".
What model are you blubbering about?
FEMA does not mention WTC 7
It wasn't in their charge.
the 9/11
Omission report does not mention it either, and you simply refuse to
acknowledge reality.
It wasn't in their charge either.
I urge you though to continue to live in your delusional hole as you
are fully deserving of the fate your betters have in store for you..
"my betters"? Would that include you? ROTFLMAO.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 08:36:06 PM |
|
|
On 10 Aug 2006 03:10:44 -0700, "Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com>
wrote:
John P. wrote:
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message
The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC
buildings
fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds for the
towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates the towers
fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?
Because people can use a clock, they can count seconds, and they can
see for their own eyes.
There is some incogruity there. If one can use a clock and see, then one
cannot come up with 9.5 seconds for either tower or 6.5 for WTC 7.
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv
In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera
operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. It is
still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the
collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of 14-15
seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5 seconds?
Even the 9/11 Omission Report claims a figure of 10 seconds. You are
operating under some notion that +/- 2 seconds from vacuum freefall
saves the official account. Freefall includes some wind resistance,
You really haven't a clue, do you?
which is what is always observed in controlled demolitions. Roughly,
the resistance for the towers should've been perhaps a second or two,
maybe half a second for WTC 7.
Which is probably less than what really happened. But then, you don't
really know, you're just guessing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
10 Aug 2006 05:24:25 AM |
|
|
Ok, I'm convinced. What turned the trick for me is
http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=NYPDvsLooseChange.flvclip #1, "Corey tells the cop, 'I'm sorry -- but you are wrong" after an eyewitness reportthat WT7 burned for 3 hours, which given the collapse of the previous twobuildingsis not only credible, but highly probable.I have disagreement with Einstein based on his mathematics, but Schoenfeldis simply a lunatic and is accordingly *plonked*.Thank you for the link.Androcles."John P." <AdmiralPee@neveragainvolunteeryourself.com> wrote in messagenews:FoCdnQCWzbhTcUfZnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@comcast.com...| "Schoenfeld" wrote in a message|| >> The bigger question is, why do people continue to ask how the WTC| >> buildings| >> fell at freefall speed, which the claim to be around 9.5 seconds forthe| >> towers and 6.5 seconds for WTC 7, when the evidence indicates thetowers| >> fell in 14+ seconds and WTC 7 in 13?|| > Because people can use a clock, they can count seconds, and they can| > see for their own eyes.|| There is some incogruity there. If one can use a clock and see, then one| cannot come up with 9.5 seconds for either tower or 6.5 for WTC 7.||http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=WTC2Collapse.flv| In this video, you'll note that at around the 12 second mark, the camera| operator turns the camera towards the collapsing tower one final time. Itis| still collapsing and has about 40 floors or so to go. That would put the| collapsed firmly at something over 12 seconds, in the neighborhood of14-15| seconds. How would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 9.5seconds?|||http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c23/JPPics/?action=view¤t=911NewsReport.flv| In this video, you can see the initiation of the WTC 7 collapse - the| mechanical penthouse on the left, collapsing through the roof. For 6| seconds, you cannot see what is happening, then you can see the reminderof| the collapse. You get a total collapse time of right at 13 seconds. How| would one use a clock and eyesight to see that as 6.5 seconds?|| > The need is to account for the evidence. Either Galileo was wrong or|| Galileo did fine. Perhaps he just had a better watch than most alternate| conspiracy theorists have?|| > WTC 1,2 & 7 were brought down by controlled demolition.|| WTC 1 & 2 were brought down by a combination of fuel laden 767's crashing| into them and the resulting fires. The evidence and facts allow anyone to| arrive at that conclusion. There is no evidence and are no facts tosupport| any of the alternate theories - they are based on false information, some| times doctored evidence, misinterpretation of evidence, bad guesses, bad| science, or just wishful thinking.|| WTC 7 was brought down by the same thing that brought down 24 other| buildings in the area around the WTC towers - the collapsing towers. How| could anyone not grasp how 1 out of 25 buildings collapsed while at thesame| time readily understanding how the other 24 were damaged or destroyed bythe| collapsing towers?|| The building was heavily damaged and had extensive fires. There is no| evidence that allows one to arrive at any conclusion other than the damage| and the fires causing the collapse.||| > If H is the average floor-height and N is the total number of floors| > inthe building, then the optimal collapse solution for the pancake| > model is N separate freefalls each of height H.|| > The video evidence clearly shows 1 freefall of height N*H for each| > building.|| It clearly doesn't. The buildings were not designed to handle the huge| dynamic loads placed on the structure once the collapse initiate. Thereare| no structural engineers that see anything suspicious or wrong about theway| they collapse or the amount of time it took for them to collapse. Les| Robertson was *surprised* (and thankful) that they stood as long as they| did.||
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
09 Aug 2006 10:29:01 AM |
|
|
If you continue to rant without responding to questions and answers
I shall be compelled to simply ignore you as I do with similar
tyrants.
Androcles.
"Schoenfeld" <schoenfeld1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155135148.151438.133850@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
| groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
| gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
| that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics destroys
| the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these physics
| elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
| themselves, freefall through concrete?
|
| Well the evidence clearly suggests that the vast majority of these
| people are the most ignorant in the society. As bizzare as that sounds,
| think about that for some time, and you may realize why things are
| structured in the way they are and why such people act in the way they
| act. It's a pyramid of elitism, a pyramid of ignorance, a pyramid of
| deception.
|
| The problem is not that, though. The problem is that they deceive the
| masses into giving them the presumption of competence and ultimately
| authority over the dissemination of knowledge. As a result, the masses
| walk into education systems to get taught "look how smart I, the
| vanity-filled instructor, am" and walk right out thinking "math is
| hard" and "I'm no genius like them so I have no chance". In reality all
| the pyramid has done is obfuscated and complicated the otherwise
| simple, child-like laws of nature. Through the elaborate symbology and
| vanity-priority 'nomenclature' the pyramid of elitism constructs the
| mind prisons that enslave the masses with their own ignorance. For the
| pyramid seeks not to educate in the interest of objective progress, but
| rather to subdue in the pursuit of the vanity of its elite, and the
| acquisition of their immediate pleasures.
|
| Such is the degree of this deception that in todays Orwellian world,
| the ordinary individual can see a building FREEFALL INTO ITSELF and not
| even realize it, not even question it, for whatever the pyramid said it
| was means more than anything physical, tangible evidence could ever
| say...
|
| George Orwell was right, 2 + 2 really does equal 5.
|
| http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
|
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
12 Aug 2006 10:45:54 AM |
|
|
Schoenfeld wrote:
Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics destroys
the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these physics
elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
themselves, freefall through concrete?
[snip]
The falling time was about equal to freefall time just because Galileo
was right and rate of fall is independent of mass while the time to
melt and destroy each floor support structure was negligible as
compared to the total fall time. It has to do with the way the T-beams
are connected in these type of structures. You would be correct if the
structure was all concrete, something impossible to achieve with these
type of buildings.
I am surprised you are getting involved with such issues because you
know very little physics and you have no practical field experience to
understand them. You seem you just like to dream of conspiracies which
is a clear sign of schizophrenia as a competent doctor will tell you.
Well, that reminds me of SCHOENFELDS LAWS OF MOTION:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/tree/browse_frm/thread/81ccf87c504396b2/92d84e95ac2bb07e?rnum=1&hl=en&q=Schoenfeld%27s+laws+of+motion&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsci.physics%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F81ccf87c504396b2%3Ftvc%3D1%26q%3DSchoenfeld%27s+laws+of+motion%26hl%3Den%26#doc_92d84e95ac2bb07e
hahahahahahahahahaha
Mike
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Igor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Physics Establishment: Choir Of Parrots |
09 Aug 2006 11:26:04 AM |
|
|
Schoenfeld wrote:
Why haven't the Wittens of the world, the Wheelers, their loyal
groupies, those so called 'experts' who love to sell fables on
gravitation and call others 'laymen', those who love to tell others
that they 'have no chance', realized yet that Galilean physics destroys
the 9/11 official story to shreds at first sight? Why are these physics
elites still telling us that buildings can spontaneously freefall into
themselves, freefall through concrete?
Well the evidence clearly suggests that the vast majority of these
people are the most ignorant in the society. As bizzare as that sounds,
think about that for some time, and you may realize why things are
structured in the way they are and why such people act in the way they
act. It's a pyramid of elitism, a pyramid of ignorance, a pyramid of
deception.
The problem is not that, though. The problem is that they deceive the
masses into giving them the presumption of competence and ultimately
authority over the dissemination of knowledge. As a result, the masses
walk into education systems to get taught "look how smart I, the
vanity-filled instructor, am" and walk right out thinking "math is
hard" and "I'm no genius like them so I have no chance". In reality all
the pyramid has done is obfuscated and complicated the otherwise
simple, child-like laws of nature. Through the elaborate symbology and
vanity-priority 'nomenclature' the pyramid of elitism constructs the
mind prisons that enslave the masses with their own ignorance. For the
pyramid seeks not to educate in the interest of objective progress, but
rather to subdue in the pursuit of the vanity of its elite, and the
acquisition of their immediate pleasures.
Such is the degree of this deception that in todays Orwellian world,
the ordinary individual can see a building FREEFALL INTO ITSELF and not
even realize it, not even question it, for whatever the pyramid said it
was means more than anything physical, tangible evidence could ever
say...
George Orwell was right, 2 + 2 really does equal 5.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
I think you win this week's Gazornanplat award.
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|