• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A Truther writes...

bill smith said:
Remember this post ?

'' If 10% of an item can crush the lower and stronger 90% of the same structure by gravity alone then you will surely be able to show the readers other examples of this happening. Choose any example from the recorded history of this planet ''

I don't mind whether your example shows the top 10% picking up material or not.
Click to expand...
Bill:
Show us that the top 10% actually crushed the bottom 90%? This never happened on 9/11. I asked you this before and you dodged the question. The "readers" are seeing you sweat!
 
16.5 said:
Wow... that site is odd... a line, your name, somebody else's post, another line..... weird.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's very primitive. It also contains no HTML tags making it very difficult a lot of the time to see when someone is being quoted.
 
Bell said:
Did you read my previous posts?
Click to expand...

bill smith said:
Thank you. Not a bad explanation. So Raders you can see the point....the top 10% CANNOT crush the lower 90% at all let aone as quickly as the unimpeded block hits the table. On 9/11 we are supposed to believe that the small block crushed the large block almost as quickly as the seperate small block hits the table by falling through the fresh air.
Click to expand...

Apparently not...
 
DGM said:
Bill:
Show us that the top 10% actually crushed the bottom 90%? This never happened on 9/11. I asked you this before and you dodged the question. The "readers" are seeing you sweat!
Click to expand...

Maybe after you show the example I've been asking for.
 
bill smith said:
Thank you. Not a bad explanation. So Raders you can see the point....the top 10% CANNOT crush the lower 90% at all let aone as quickly as the unimpeded block hits the table. On 9/11 we are supposed to believe that the small block crushed the large block almost as quickly as the seperate small block hits the table by falling through the fresh air.
Click to expand...

Of course that would be true if we were talking about cardboard boxes. Unfortunately that very same demonstration could also show that this is impossible:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o

Also, the twin towers were not "blocks". Your 90%, 10% and "almost as quickly"s are arbitrary qualifiers.
 
bill smith said:
Maybe after you show the example I've been asking for.
Click to expand...
Domino's and avalanches are excellent examples.

Bill your asking to disprove something that never actually happened. The "readers" are waiting for you to show that you have a valid argument in the first place. So far all you can do is keep repeating a lie that the "truth" movement wants everyone to believe. That is that the top 10% crushed the bottom 90%.
 
angrysoba said:
Of course that would be true if we were talking about cardboard boxes. Unfortunately that very same demonstration could also show that this is impossible:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o

Also, the twin towers were not "blocks". Your 90%, 10% and "almost as quickly"s are arbitrary qualifiers.
Click to expand...

Here is an example of why the verinage technique does not apply to the 9/11 paradigm. You. like many another before you have tried to cloud the minds of concerned citizen Readers with this red herring.

If you watch the example video yoou will note the grinding mnoise as the upper section's weight begins to bear n the larger lower section. This is the force of gravity acting. But why is the upper section now crushing the lower section that had carried it for it's entire working lfe ?

A person doesn't have to be very clever to realise that some structural elements have been mechanically removed or modified with jacks or cables in the lower load bearing structure allowing the upper portion to crush the weakened lower portion. Have a look at the structure that remains after the initial collapse.

Freeze the video at 27 seconds.Can you see that that part has not yet been set up for demoliion and is still standing strong ?

Verinage will not help debunkers..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prwvj-npt5s grinding concrete
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I'm writing all this down Oystein.please continue.
Click to expand...

No need to. You asked for examples from the real world of small falling masses having an increasingly destructive effect as they make larger and larges masses fall along. All through gravity alone.

You seemed to imply such things don't exist.
I showed you they do.
Time for you to concede that.

But if you need more examples:

WTC1
WTC2
WTC7
 
Bill, you do know that the top 10% did not crush the bottom 90%, but merely the floor below it, right? If you do not think this is the case, please suggest an alternative to how the towers collapsed.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
A person doesn't have to be very clever to realise that some structural elements have been mechanically removed or modified with jacks or cables in the lower load bearing structure allowing the upper portion to crush the weakened lower portion.
Click to expand...

Structural support was removed in the Twin Towers as well by the aircraft impacts and heat weakening from the fires.
 
DGM said:
Domino's and avalanches are excellent examples.

Bill your asking to disprove something that never actually happened. The "readers" are waiting for you to show that you have a valid argument in the first place. So far all you can do is keep repeating a lie that the "truth" movement wants everyone to believe. That is that the top 10% crushed the bottom 90%.
Click to expand...

Nope. I want better examples than say dominoes. The Readers may have noticed that a single falling domiono may have triggered the cascade but the action is for the rest is all horizontal.
 
Oystein said:
No need to. You asked for examples from the real world of small falling masses having an increasingly destructive effect as they make larger and larges masses fall along. All through gravity alone.

You seemed to imply such things don't exist.
I showed you they do.
Time for you to concede that.

But if you need more examples:

WTC1
WTC2
WTC7
Click to expand...


Well that explains it all then ..lol
 
bill smith said:
Nope. I want better examples than say dominoes. The Readers may have noticed that a single falling domiono may have triggered the cascade but the action is for the rest is all horizontal.
Click to expand...
You still have not shown that the top 10% crushed the bottom 90%. Why should I argue that it can't happen when it never did? The "readers" see this.

Why are you promoting a lie?
 
bill smith said:
A person doesn't have to be very clever to realise that some structural elements have been mechanically removed or modified with jacks or cables in the lower load bearing structure allowing the upper portion to crush the weakened lower portion. Have a look at the structure that remains after the initial collapse.
Click to expand...

A person doesn't have to be very clever to realize that some structural elements have been rather brutally removed or "modified" prior to the Twin Towers collapses when looking at these two pictures:

the%20world%20trade%20center.jpg


world_trade_center.jpg
 
bill smith said:
If 10% of an item can crush the lower and stronger 90% of the same structure by gravity alone then you will surely be able to show the readers other examples of this happening. Choose any example from the recorded history of this planet
Click to expand...

Arizona, ~48,000 BC.

A chunk of rock the size of a train car flash vaporized a million times its own size and mass worth of rock and blasted it 20 miles into the sky.
 
Last edited:
angrysoba said:
A person doesn't have to be very clever to realize that some structural elements have been rather brutally removed or "modified" prior to the Twin Towers collapses when looking at these two pictures:

[qimg]http://www.guardianchronicle.com/images/the%20world%20trade%20center.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://newglob.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/world_trade_center.jpg?w=300&h=222[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Dang...I never thought of that.....so it was verinage on 9/11 ? lol
 
bill smith said:
Here is an example of why the verinage technique does not apply to the 9/11 paradigm. You. like many another before you have tried to cloud the minds of concerned citizen Readers with this red herring.

If you watch the example video yoou will note the grinding mnoise as the upper section's weight begins to bear n the larger lower section. This is the force of gravity acting. But why is the upper section now crushing the lower section that had carried it for it's entire working lfe ?

A person doesn't have to be very clever to realise that some structural elements have been mechanically removed or modified with jacks or cables in the lower load bearing structure allowing the upper portion to crush the weakened lower portion. Have a look at the structure that remains after the initial collapse.

Freeze the video at 27 seconds.Can you see that that part has not yet been set up for demoliion and is still standing strong ?

Verinage will not help debunkers..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prwvj-npt5s grinding concrete
Click to expand...

Freeze the video at 29 seconds and you will see that the top 7 stories have crushed the 6th story (and little below it - NOT the bottom 6 stories)
Freeze the video at 30 seconds and you will see that the top 8 stories have crushed the 5th story (and little below it - NOT the bottom 5 stories)
Freeze the video at 31 seconds and you will see that the top 9 stories have crushed the 4th story (and little below it - NOT the bottom 4 stories)
Freeze the video at 32 seconds and you will see that the top 10 stories have crushed the 3rd story (and little below it - NOT the bottom 3 stories)
Freeze the video at the end of 32 seconds and you will see that the top 11/B] stories have crushed the 2nd story (and little below it - NOT the bottom 2 stories)
Freeze the video at 33 seconds and you will see that the top 12 stories have crushed the 1st story

Notice how the top part accumulates stories and mass every second.
Notice how the top 8 (then 9, then 10, then 11, then 12) upper stories keep moving and, if anything, pick up speed rather than losing any.
Notice how the top never destroys the entire bottom, but goes story by story.

Now suppose there had been 95 more stories below - is there any doubt that the top 13 stories would have crushed the next, and then the top 14 stories the next, and then the top 15 stories the next, and then the top 16 stories the next, and so on and on and on. until the whole mess finally hits the ground?

Because, you see, verinage demolition does not depend very much on first taking out the center story. It just needs enough top stories to overwhelm one more, and the rest goes down to the ground.
As the video shows, 6 top stories will do the trick.
The twin towers had 15 and 33 stories to start with.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom