AE911 Gets some WTC7 ANSYS data via FOIA

[Sam.I.Am]

What makes you think that they had the sirens on?

 

[The Big Dog]

Really, it definitely would? How many blocks away is the interview? Why didn't it pick up the sirens of the cop cars?

Hi Red, you clearly don't have the first freaking clue how loud an explosive is.

I mean not the first clue at all. So much so, that I as a "debunker" want to thank you for your post. It was that ridiculous.

Let us compare: a siren that is two blocks away is not that easy to hear, and if the source is pointing away, you might not be able to hear it all. A decent size demolition explosive, Red, you can't just hear it from two blocks away, Red (I will type this very slowly):

YOU. CAN. FEEL. IT.

Great Post RED!

 

[njslim]

Fire and lack of water for firefighting made WTC7 collapse.

The photographs show WTC7 on fire. The angle is one not visible from the YouTube videos since the YouTube videos were taken from a safe location to the North. The WTC7 fire was masked from these cameras by buildings that stood between WTC7 and the safe location.

There is one video (or a series of video) taken by fire photgrapher Steve
Spak which clearly show the south face of WTC 7, which was struck by
WTC 1 and set on fire.

Can see smoke pushing out from fires on multiple floors

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC7_Fire_Videos

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

It's already been established that plenty of people heard explosions on 9/11.

The prescence of secondary explosions proves the buildings were on fire.

Debunkers have even admitted plenty of times that there were explosions on 9/11.

Yes, we have (see above).

What is in dispute is what those explosions were. Whatever they were you aren't gong to find a lot of recordings of them. So what?

So if they weren't strong enough to even be recorded then they weren't from explosives.

 

[alienentity]

And yet you expect these same cameras to record sounds of internal explosions, assuming they had the capability of doing so.

Funny how camcorders always manage to pick up the sound of explosives during controlled demolitions.
But not a single one when WTC7 collapsed.

Hmmm, I wonder why?

 

[TruthersLie]

And yet you expect these same cameras to record sounds of internal explosions, assuming they had the capability of doing so.

No red.

Your comprehension of what CD explosives sound like is rather limiting. And yoru arguments from ignorance and incredulity on this topic are rather stunning.

ANY cd charges going off capable of cutting the steel beams on wtc7 would have produced a sound level above 160 decibels. That is incredibly loud.

Those types of explosions would not have been very muffled in a building missing lots of windows. Even in a building completely enclosed by windows the overpressure and the shrapnel would shatter all of the windows.

It would be clear and sharp and incredibly hard to miss EVEN BLOCKS AWAY.

Yet not one video has any sound of explosions. We have video where you can hear the RUMBLE as the building collapses, but no explosions.

why is that?

 

[Scott Sommers]

And yet you expect these same cameras to record sounds of internal explosions, assuming they had the capability of doing so.

What does the Washington Post...I mean Times say about this? They're the mainstream media and owned by the Moonies at the same time.

 

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by BigAl
Fire and lack of water for firefighting made WTC7 collapse.

The photographs show WTC7 on fire. The angle is one not visible from the YouTube videos since the YouTube videos were taken from a safe location to the North. The WTC7 fire was masked from these cameras by buildings that stood between WTC7 and the safe location.

And yet you expect these same cameras to record sounds of internal explosions, assuming they had the capability of doing so.

The place that I believe the press cameras were placed was near Canal St & Church St. This is the long shot from the north that is the only WTC7 collapse video I have seen. That's 0.7 miles from GZ. That's not that far for sound of man-made demolition to carry. In any case, none of the cameras that were closer recorded anything and none of the many thousands of people within the 0.7 mile radius report sounds consistent in timing and brisance with man-made demolition when WTC7 came down.

 

[RedIbis]

[...]nanoenergetics hold promise as use-ful ingredients for the thermobaric (TBX) and TBX-like weapons, particularly due to their high degree of tailorability with regards to energy release and impulse management.

What do you guys think "impulse management" might mean?

 

[BigAl]

What do you guys think "impulse management" might mean?

I say they mean the ability to design a specific pressure over time curve when it goes bang. This is related to the brisance value of an explosive compound.

The idea of thermobaric (TBX) explosives at WTC is just as stupid as any kind of thermite and explosive demolition. I don't think TBX would do anything but blow all the glass out of a WTC tower.

 

[dtugg]

I don't think RedIbis even knows what a thermobaric weapon is.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

What do you guys think "impulse management" might mean?

Why don't you find out for us?

 

[Childlike Empress]

John Young of cryptome.org is the guest of yesterday's episode of Sibel Edmonds' podcast show. Should be interesting.

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2010/03/13/podcast-show-25/

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

John Young of cryptome.org is the guest of yesterday's episode of Sibel Edmonds' podcast show. Should be interesting.

That bitch yaks a lot for being the "most gagged woman in america".

And now she has her own show where she interviews other people?

If the NWO really existed, wouldn't they have bumped her off by now?

 

[Childlike Empress]

It's episode 25 already. "The NWO" isn't so worried because most people, like you, simply don't pay attention. But Jesus hates you for calling her a bitch.

 

[Profanz]

That bitch yaks a lot for being the "most gagged woman in america".

And now she has her own show where she interviews other people?

If the NWO really existed, wouldn't they have bumped her off by now?

Yes. It kind of makes you wonder why Ashcroft retroactively classified the documents she wanted to talk about in the first place. Why did they bother if it's all really just a bunch of nonsense?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

But Jesus hates you for calling her a bitch.

God loves all his children, but like any parent is probably very disappointed when one of them grows up to be a bitch.

Yes. It kind of makes you wonder why Ashcroft retroactively classified the documents she wanted to talk about in the first place. Why did they bother if it's all really just a bunch of nonsense?

[dumbass]
Because all the attack orders for the ninja demo crews on 9/11 written in turkish and given to the FBI to burn and bury not thinking that there might be some low-grade desk flunky who speaks turkish there.
[/dumbass]

 

[RedIbis]

I say they mean the ability to design a specific pressure over time curve when it goes bang. This is related to the brisance value of an explosive compound.

The idea of thermobaric (TBX) explosives at WTC is just as stupid as any kind of thermite and explosive demolition. I don't think TBX would do anything but blow all the glass out of a WTC tower.

Bare assertion fallacy.

 

[Profanz]

So if they weren't strong enough to even be recorded then they weren't from explosives.

But there were explosions witnessed and some recorded on 9/11. Some people even firefighters thought they were bombs. You can only pretend to know after the fact they were or weren't. This is the essence of JREF 9/11 debunking. That and name calling.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

But there were explosions witnessed and some recorded on 9/11.

Secondary explosions are common in structural fires. No explosive signaturesa were recorded by LDEO or Protecs seismographs. Since naturally occurring secondary explosions don't come from charges affixed directly to a buildings structural supports, which are in turn rooted to the buildings foundation, they won't show up on siesmographs.

The behavior and characteristics of the explosions witnessed on 9/11 match secondary fire explosions. They do not match demolition charges.

How many times do we have to explain this to you?

Some people even firefighters thought they were bombs.

They weren't looking at seismograph readouts when they said that and they don't think that way today.

You can only pretend to know after the fact they were or weren't.

We're not pretending, we actually do know. You're attempting to project your state of ignorance onto us.

This is the essence of JREF 9/11 debunking. That and name calling.

Name-calling is against the JREF forum member agreement.