Merged Core-led collapse and explosive demolition

[ergo]

Talking about the towers here. My post in this thread got me thinking about the towers' cores and the argument that explosive demolition will be easily recognizable by its sound. Bedunkers typically refer to videos of controlled demolitions with the signature loud bang-bang-bang sounds of the detonations (although videos exist of CDs where the loud bangs are barely distinguishable from other kinds of noises, e.g.: the Stardust in Las Vegas).

So we know what controlled demolition using detonation charges sounds like in emptied out buildings where the charges are laid throughout the building, including the perimeter structures. Do we know what detonations sound like if they have only been laid in the core column structure, in a building that has not been emptied out - indeed, is full of furniture, and sadly, still has people in it? I don't think we can know that because it hasn't occurred before.

Putting detonation charges on only the core columns, at intervals, would mitigate the sound. Perhaps not many charges would be needed to bring down the core. We certainly have read and heard testimony about the huge explosions that occurred in the basement levels, and have seen and heard the evidence of the blown-out lobbies, which cannot be explained by a fuel fireball traveling half a kilometre down through a staggered elevator system, as Jeff King easily points out. As well as testimony from inside-the-tower witnesses of explosions occurring on levels below them.

If the perimeter columns merely needed to be cut up so they can peel off in the manner we see, then incendiaries could do that job. But to sink the core would probably require explosives - maybe not typical of typical CD, but explosions that were indeed heard by witnesses.

 

[Dave Rogers]

So we know what controlled demolition using detonation charges sounds like in emptied out buildings where the charges are laid throughout the building, including the perimeter structures. Do we know what detonations sound like if they have only been laid in the core column structure, in a building that has not been emptied out - indeed, is full of furniture, and sadly, still has people in it? I don't think we can know that because it hasn't occurred before.

I think we can expect that they would have been audible inside the building. Since they were absent from the phone calls in progress from inside when the collapses started, we can conclude that they weren't there.

Dave

 

[Macgyver1968]

Bedunkers typically refer to videos of controlled demolitions with the signature loud bang-bang-bang sounds of the detonations (although videos exist of CDs where the loud bangs are barely distinguishable from other kinds of noises, e.g.: the Stardust in Las Vegas).

Huh? what "other kinds of noises" are going off when the explosives detonate in the that Stardust video you linked?

Here's when they go off: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbuW2cKZTyA#t=04m23s

All you hear is loud "boom boom boom"..then the crowd cheers after the collapse.

 

[Oystein]

Talking about the towers here. My post in this thread got me thinking about the towers' cores and the argument that explosive demolition will be easily recognizable by its sound. Bedunkers typically refer to videos of controlled demolitions with the signature loud bang-bang-bang sounds of the detonations (although videos exist of CDs where the loud bangs are barely distinguishable from other kinds of noises, e.g.: the Stardust in Las Vegas).

What a shameless liar you are!
Between 4:22 and 4:40, the BANGS of the explosive charge are far and out the loudest thing you hear on the video. The unmistakeable BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG of controlled demolitions.
What you don't hear indeed is the sound of the building collapsing. So please notice: The sound of the cutting charges is MUCH louder than the sound of the collapse. We have plenty of videos that recorded the noise of the WTC collapses, but none that recorded ANY explosions, not even the faintest, just before collapse initiation.

So we know what controlled demolition using detonation charges sounds like in emptied out buildings where the charges are laid throughout the building, including the perimeter structures. Do we know what detonations sound like if they have only been laid in the core column structure, in a building that has not been emptied out - indeed, is full of furniture, and sadly, still has people in it? I don't think we can know that because it hasn't occurred before.

Since there were open office spaces between the core and the perimeter of the towers, and half of the perimeter surface was glass, we have a pretty good idea of what it would sound like. Like this:
BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG
(Font is one point smaller to account for some muffling)

Putting detonation charges on only the core columns, at intervals, would mitigate the sound.

Says who? Evidence?
This is pure guesswork and bare-assed assertion.

Perhaps not many charges would be needed to bring down the core.

Says who? Evidence?
This is pure guesswork and bare-assed assertion.

We certainly have read and heard testimony about the huge explosions that occurred in the basement levels, and have seen and heard the evidence of the blown-out lobbies, which cannot be explained by a fuel fireball traveling half a kilometre down through a staggered elevator system, as Jeff King easily points out. As well as testimony from inside-the-tower witnesses of explosions occurring on levels below them.

None of these booms was consistent in timing, brisance and location with explosive demolition charges: Collapse was top down and arrived at the lobby second to last, and the basement last. Nothing that went "boom" down there long before the collapse had anything to do with the collapse.
This is common sense.

If the perimeter columns merely needed to be cut up so they can peel off in the manner we see, then incendiaries could do that job.

Says who? Evidence?
This is pure guesswork and bare-assed assertion.

But to sink the core would probably require explosives - maybe not typical of typical CD, but explosions that were indeed heard by witnesses.

No explosions were heard around the time that the collapse began, but if there had been any, all would have been recorded by all recording devices around.
None were.
Theory debunked.

/THREAD

 

[Macgyver1968]

At about 1 minute into the video, they have a full-on display of fireworks. Listen to how loud the fireworks were at that point in the video, and the click over to 4:22 and immediately compare the sounds of the actual demo explosions. The demo charges are twice as loud or more.

I don't see how someone can watch that video, and then proclaim the sounds of the explosives are not clearly heard.

 

[The Platypus]

A handful of people on 911 hearing something they described as an "explosion", doesn't even come remotely close to suggesting a controlled demolition, regardless of all your wild speculative delusions...

 

[BobHaulk]

what about the possibility of silent explosives? We know that TNT makes a loud bang but what about CIA (Core In-Audable) explosives.

 

[twinstead]

what about the possibility of silent explosives? We know that TNT makes a loud bang but what about CIA (Core In-Audable) explosives.

HushaBoom^TM is MUCH more advanced.

 

[ergo]

At about 1 minute into the video, they have a full-on display of fireworks. Listen to how loud the fireworks were at that point in the video, and the click over to 4:22 and immediately compare the sounds of the actual demo explosions. The demo charges are twice as loud or more.

I don't see how someone can watch that video, and then proclaim the sounds of the explosives are not clearly heard.

Actually, it was the fireworks I was referring to. The demolition sounds are not much louder than the fireworks which precedes them. (Certainly not "twice" as loud.)

But this is a minor point in my OP. The question is, what do detonations from an inner core in a building filled with furniture sound like on the outside? We don't know, do we?

And who's to say the explosions were from traditional CD charges? Other kinds of bombs could have been used.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Only been laid in the core column structure? That still doesn't explain how the stairwell B survivors, who were trapped in an area near a core column when the building collapsed, survived.

Unless somehow, magically, core demolitions went off... except where those folks were at.

Well... why should I bother? This is all about shoehorning demolitions into the narrative, not about being logical.

 

[Oystein]

Actually, it was the fireworks I was referring to. The demolition sounds are not much louder than the fireworks which precedes them. (Certainly not "twice" as loud.)

You can't reliably compare volumes of explosions recorded by an ordinary consumer video camera. The recording level auto-adjusts, which means that pretty much any explosion will max out. You can't possibly tell if two explosions are equally loud or if one is 100 times louder than the other.
You will however appreciate that fireworks are designed to go BOOM loudly, it is part of their intended effects.

But this is a minor point in my OP. The question is, what do detonations from an inner core in a building filled with furniture sound like on the outside? We don't know, do we?

That "we" includes you: You don't know.
But it is your theory.
So you are the one I expect to do the legwork instead of the guesswork.

And who's to say the explosions were from traditional CD charges? Other kinds of bombs could have been used.

Awww nooo - look at the post immediately preceding yours:

HushaBoom^TM is MUCH more advanced.

Too bad twinstead didn't file a challenge with James Randi, or else he might reap that million. Then again, it was dead easy to predict that you and your silliness would have to rely on HushaBoom^TM.

 

[1337m4n]

I think this might be an example of Mackey's "Inflationary Model".

Normal Hypothesis: It is likely that the towers were destroyed by impact damage and fire. Alternatively, we should consider the possibility they were destroyed by internal explosives.

Conspiracy Hypothesis: The towers were destroyed by internal explosives.


PROBLEM: Explosives would be highly audible, and there is no such sound on any of the collapse footage.

Normal Hypothesis's Explanation: Explosives should be ruled out at this point until there is compelling evidence of their existence.

Conspiracy Hypothesis's Explanation: The explosives must have been planted using a previously unheard-of method of making the blasts silent.



The official hypothesis takes all known possibilities and, when presented with new facts, eliminates possibilities that contradict those facts.

The conspiracy hypothesis starts from an unsupported speculation and, when presented with new facts, creates a second unsupported speculation in an attempt to render those facts moot.

The conspiracy hypothesis gets bigger, more convoluted, and more incomprehensible as it is confronted with new information. The official hypothesis needs only make relatively minor adjustments as it is confronted with new information.

Learn how to do science, ergo.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packag...12_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html

All you hear is a rumbling in the street. It sounded like an earthquake. When I
was a younger kid, I was in an earthquake and it felt like the same exact feeling. I looked, and I could see the antenna on the top of the roof coming straight down. - FIREFIGHTER JOHN AMATO

I remember just hearing an explosion that basically I can't describe the sound of. It was actually the second plane crashing in. We were on the side, we were on the south side of the south tower when it came down -- I mean when the plane crashed in. I just basically said to myself something is not right here. It didn't feel right to me. I told my boss, just I said to him this doesn't feel right. We don't belong here. He said yes, I know, come on. - FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BEEHLER

Just as we got towards the walkway, I looked back because I heard what I thought was another jet, and it was the building on its way down already. - FIREFIGHTER PAUL BESSLER

Yeah right, explosions really meant "explosives", quote mine the firefighters why don't ya.

 

[Disbelief]

Actually, it was the fireworks I was referring to. The demolition sounds are not much louder than the fireworks which precedes them. (Certainly not "twice" as loud.)

But this is a minor point in my OP. The question is, what do detonations from an inner core in a building filled with furniture sound like on the outside? We don't know, do we?

And who's to say the explosions were from traditional CD charges? Other kinds of bombs could have been used.

Well, do some calculations and see what you come up with. Estimate what the sound absorption would be and see if it would be enough to muffle the explosions. You should be able to find equations and material information with your investigoogling.

 

[ergo]

Only been laid in the core column structure? That still doesn't explain how the stairwell B survivors, who were trapped in an area near a core column when the building collapsed, survived.

Unless somehow, magically, core demolitions went off... except where those folks were at.

Yes, I did say "at intervals."

 

[1337m4n]

BTW ergo, even if you explain the lack of audible blasts, you still need to explain the lack of a seismic shockwave.

 

[ergo]

Hi, Oystein. You've taken me off Ignore?

That "we" includes you: You don't know.

So you DO know how detonations from an inner core in a building filled with furniture sound like on the outside? How would you know this?

 

[Oystein]

Hi, Oystein. You've taken me off Ignore?

No. You are still on ignore, but when I am not logged in, I see your posts, and, well, sometimes plain old curiosity and that evil urge to gawk terrible wrecks gets the better of me

So you DO know how detonations from an inner core in a building filled with furniture sound like on the outside? How would you know this?

Strawman.
You conveniently and dishonestly cut away important parts of my posts so far. I'll repeat:

But it is your theory.
So you are the one I expect to do the legwork instead of the guesswork.

Also:
You ignored the hint that Hush-A-Booms^TM do not exist as they are oxymoronic. Invoking them is moronic.
Please address this criticism: How do you make explosive charges silent that have the brisance and energy to cut MASSIVE steel members?

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

If a car back-fires, Ergo would proclaim: "It was from an explosive!"

If a balloon pops, Ergo would proclaim: "It was from an explosive!"

If a tire explodes, Ergo would proclaim: "It was from an explosive!"

If someone farted, Ergo would proclaim: "It was from an explosive!"

If a turkey explodes in the oven, Ergo would proclaim: "It was from an explosive!"

If a car crash occured, Ergo would proclaim: "It was from an explosive!"

 

[Animal]

Talking about the towers here. My post in this thread got me thinking about the towers' cores and the argument that explosive demolition will be easily recognizable by its sound. Bedunkers typically refer to videos of controlled demolitions with the signature loud bang-bang-bang sounds of the detonations (although videos exist of CDs where the loud bangs are barely distinguishable from other kinds of noises, e.g.: the Stardust in Las Vegas).

So we know what controlled demolition using detonation charges sounds like in emptied out buildings where the charges are laid throughout the building, including the perimeter structures. Do we know what detonations sound like if they have only been laid in the core column structure, in a building that has not been emptied out - indeed, is full of furniture, and sadly, still has people in it? I don't think we can know that because it hasn't occurred before.

Putting detonation charges on only the core columns, at intervals, would mitigate the sound. Perhaps not many charges would be needed to bring down the core. We certainly have read and heard testimony about the huge explosions that occurred in the basement levels, and have seen and heard the evidence of the blown-out lobbies, which cannot be explained by a fuel fireball traveling half a kilometre down through a staggered elevator system, as Jeff King easily points out. As well as testimony from inside-the-tower witnesses of explosions occurring on levels below them.

If the perimeter columns merely needed to be cut up so they can peel off in the manner we see, then incendiaries could do that job. But to sink the core would probably require explosives - maybe not typical of typical CD, but explosions that were indeed heard by witnesses.

Basic problem with your speculation is that in any controlled demolition, the structure is pre-weakened to reduce the amount of the charge required fracture the structural member. The core columns would have required vastly greater explosive charges to fracture, far greater than in any previous controlled demolition. No explosive signature was recorded on any of the seismic monitoring stations. Now look at the third illustration in the link and describe how any device could be attached to the perimeter columns and not be noticed by the occupants.
http://guardian.150m.com/wtc/godfrey.htm

Regarding your speculation about the elevators. The only elevators that were staggered were the "sky lobby" ones. The local elevators were stacked, and there were the express elevators to the top floors as well as freight elevators that serviced all floors.