North Tower Dust Cloud Calcs Prove Explosives

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

We know that every floor was pulverized because

1) We have multiple videos of it taking place. We observe, right from the beginning of each "collapse", huge quantities of very dense, heavy dust being systematically ejected sideways in all four directions.

2) At no time to we observe floors falling into one another.

3) When it is over, we do not observe intact concrete floors stacked up. Each floor was about one acre in area, by about 4 inches thick, and held in a steel pan. Instead, we observe a smoldering crater. If the floors were not pulverized, where are they? Where are 110 acre-sized floors, stacked up and broken into pieces?

Guys, look at the pictures. The floors were obliterated.

The "metorite" picture is quite interesting too. What is this stuff? Was it previously molten? Have samples been made available for testing? I'm sure Dr. Jones would love to do some testing to see what it is. In any case, the "metorite" would account for, what, 1/100,000 of the floors?

False dichotomy. It is not either they were completely pulverized or they should be intact. Fragmentation does not mean it was necessarily pulverized. It is a false premise to assume that because a floor was fragmented that it was therefore pulverized into N micron size particles.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Nobby offered

Of course conservation of energy will affect fall times.

In order for an object to fall from its height all the way to the ground at free fall speed, 100% of its stored GPE is converted to KE and put to work accelerating the mass downward. Any other work done along the way must be subtracted from the energy available to accelerate the mass downward. Less acceleration means it is going to take longer to get to the ground. This is why air resistance increases the fall times of objects. Some of the available energy is spent pushing the air out of the way.

Can some of you OCT's who actually understand conservation of energy please correct your more science-challenged debate partners, please? Thank you.

IT DID NOT COLLAPSE IN A FREE-FALL IN A VACUUM AMOUNT OF TIME!

 

[jujigatami]

We know that every floor was pulverized because

1) We have multiple videos of it taking place. We observe, right from the beginning of each "collapse", huge quantities of very dense, heavy dust being systematically ejected sideways in all four directions.

2) At no time to we observe floors falling into one another.

3) When it is over, we do not observe intact concrete floors stacked up. Each floor was about one acre in area, by about 4 inches thick, and held in a steel pan. Instead, we observe a smoldering crater. If the floors were not pulverized, where are they? Where are 110 acre-sized floors, stacked up and broken into pieces?

Guys, look at the pictures. The floors were obliterated.

There was no smoldering crater!

There was a 15 story high smoldering pile of rubble.

There were HUGE concrete chuncks of rubble. I saw them being trucked away WITH MY OWN EYES! No grainy youtube video, I was there for 9/11 and for weeks afterward. I saw it all INCLUDING the cleanup.

The very idea that ALL of the concrete was pulverized is absolutely ludicrous.

I'm sure there was a lot of concrete that was "pulverized" But as I watched the recovery and cleanup efforts FROM MY OFFICE WINDOW I saw tons and tons of concrete get carted away.

 

[RenaissanceBiker]

We know that every floor was pulverized because

1) We have multiple videos of it taking place. We observe, right from the beginning of each "collapse", huge quantities of very dense, heavy dust being systematically ejected sideways in all four directions.

2) At no time to we observe floors falling into one another.

Everytime I watch the videos I observe the floors falling into one another. It's what causes all that dust.

3) When it is over, we do not observe intact concrete floors stacked up. Each floor was about one acre in area, by about 4 inches thick, and held in a steel pan. Instead, we observe a smoldering crater. If the floors were not pulverized, where are they? Where are 110 acre-sized floors, stacked up and broken into pieces?

Guys, look at the pictures. The floors were obliterated.

Much of the concrete from the floors was pulverized in the collapse. That's what we would expect in this kind of structural failure. No explosives are needed for this to happen. Nothing in the recordings of the collapse or the physical evidence after the collapse supports your theory.

Edit: jujigatami is an eye witness to large chunks of concrete debris at the site. Yet this is probably not enough to convince you.

 

[chipmunk stew]

In order for an object to fall from its height all the way to the ground at free fall speed,

We can stop reading there. You're arguing a moot point:

THE TOWERS DIDN'T COLLAPSE AT FREEFALL

 

[dirtywick]

Slipknotmcfadden - Welcome to the Forum.

You are correct of course. Even more so, why are Alex Jones, James Fetzer, and Dylan Avery all still alive. The argument that they are "Too well known" is bullcrap. There are people in this world who for a small fee will go to great lengths to make murders look like accidents, and I am sure If they wanted to, the big bad gumint got da money.

But they just brush this off. I like to call it the "Maddox" principle (see his sites blurb on 9/11 conspiracy).

TAM

What is perhaps more interesting is that they believe the government hires "shills" to register at their website to cause trouble. Seriously, the best this shadow organization can come up with to deal with the "truth movement", this same organization I remind you, orchestrated the most perfectly executed and extremely complicated mass murder in modern history, is to hire highly paid government agents to talk some BS on a website?

I find that to be more ludicrious than the CT itself.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

...However, it doesn't make any difference whether it was 400,000 cubic meters of concrete that was pulverized, or 5,000 cubic meters .

The important point of my physics challenge is that every floor in the building was a concrete slab, and every floor was pulverized. Also, the entire steel structure was broken down to pieces. There is no way to explain this pulverization without explosives.

Of course this is so wrong as to be remarkable.

The government has never bothered to provide details on the collapse of the towers for what should be obvious reasons. Namely, the towers did not collapse. Instead, they were demolished with explosives. So naturally they do not want to bring any attention to the amount of concrete that turned to powder.

An investigative researcher this gent is not.

 

[Brainache]

Guys, look at the pictures. The floors were obliterated.

The "metorite" picture is quite interesting too. What is this stuff? Was it previously molten? Have samples been made available for testing? I'm sure Dr. Jones would love to do some testing to see what it is. In any case, the "metorite" would account for, what, 1/100,000 of the floors?

I don't think it was the only large chunk of concrete found. Did you look at any of the other pics?
Someone else first posted that "meteorite" pic and said it was the peice of wreckage that Dr Jones took his original steel samples from. I can't confirm this, but someone else might remember what thread it was in...

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Nobby offered

Of course conservation of energy will affect fall times.

In order for an object to fall from its height all the way to the ground at free fall speed, 100% of its stored GPE is converted to KE and put to work accelerating the mass downward. Any other work done along the way must be subtracted from the energy available to accelerate the mass downward. Less acceleration means it is going to take longer to get to the ground. This is why air resistance increases the fall times of objects. Some of the available energy is spent pushing the air out of the way.

Can some of you OCT's who actually understand conservation of energy please correct your more science-challenged debate partners, please? Thank you.

what percentage of the concrete was crushed in "mid air" as you put it, and what percentage was cruched upon impact with the ground? (where kinetic energy can be reused)

surely with your unique ability to see through the dust cloud you can tell us this

 

[T.A.M.]

What is perhaps more interesting is that they believe the government hires "shills" to register at their website to cause trouble. Seriously, the best this shadow organization can come up with to deal with the "truth movement", this same organization I remind you, orchestrated the most perfectly executed and extremely complicated mass murder in modern history, is to hire highly paid government agents to talk some BS on a website?

I find that to be more ludicrious than the CT itself.

Ah, but you see, when you are insanely convinced that you are part of a group that could tear down the big bad USG, you feel so self important, that of course big brother is watching you, and trying to mess up your poor little innocent website. If shills weren't doing this then what fun would the "Truth" movement be. It would be like playing Dungeons and Dragons without any monsters around the corner. What fun is that?

TAM

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Truthseeker1234--

Let's assume for a moment that all the concrete did indeed get pulverized into eensy, teensy, tiny little micro dots of dust. In what way does this prove controlled demolition?

I ask, because if it does nothing for your argument, why are we even discussing it?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Hoffman allows posting of his material. I do not believe it was a ruile 4 violation.

The exapansion of the dust cloud is important, because a gravity-only collapse could not expand the cloud like that. Gravity will pressurize air to one atmosphere only.

Ok, here is a nice on for you to test. Go to Walmart or some similar place and pick up one of these pedal-air pumps for pumping car tyres. Connect it to your car and start pumping. All the power you can apply is your weight (=gravity). Can you only inflate your tyre to one atmosmhere?

In other words, you are spouting nonsense. The pressure that gravity can produce is determined by the area of the air column and the weight pressing on it.

Somehow or another, there got to be about 3 times as much pressure inside the building. This requires energy. I hope that explains to some of the above posters why this is important.

Energy from a 110 story building falling, perhaps?

If not explosvies then what? Gravity is insufficient.

False. Gravity is more than sufficient, but you can of course add the heat supplied by the falling structure.

Issuing ad hominem attacks against Hoffman does nothing for your scientific argument.

You referenced an authority. Challenging the validity of said authority is legitimate.

Hans

 

[tsig]

If not explosvies then what? Gravity is insufficient.

Issuing ad hominem attacks against Hoffman does nothing for your scientific argument. I thought I had pasted version 4, but link to any version you like.

Gravity is more than sufficient. You should lay off the attacks on gravity, you may fall.

 

[tsig]

We see a pyroclastic flow, a mushroom cloud,

I do not see this.

Was it a volcano, or a nuclear bomb?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Okay, so Hoffman's work has been shown to be flawed; anyone have a link to Ross'?

 

[The Kilted Yaksman]

Next you'll be telling us gravity pushes rather than pulls and we are all held to the ground by the gravity of the rest of the universe pushing us against the earth.

Now that's a theory I can get behind! It's not that Terra sucks, it's that the rest of the universe blows!

We now return you to your regularly scheduled metaphorical flogging of a tinfoil-hat loony...

 

[uruk]

Here is an interesting link showing damage and failure analysis of the WTC from the plane impact. :
http://www.ara.com/arasvo/NIST_WTC.htm

The videos show something interesting. The blue particles represent the fuel. The simulation shows that a large majority of the fuel ending up inside the building not outside as the CT'ers claim.
Also the site shows the damage to the support structures. An object strinking the support structure with enough energy to do that damage. has to * I repeat* has to have caused a detectable siesmic event.
So the claim that the plane impact would not cause an event is positively hog wash.

 

[cloudshipsrule]

It's my understanding that when a building is destroyed by controlled demolition, the explosives are simply used to remove columns, not to 'pulverize' each floor of the building.

The columns are blown out, and then the rest of the destruction is left up to the power of gravity. AND IT WORKS ALMOST EVERY TIME!!

What is it about this concept that is so hard for some people to grasp?

 

[bmillsap]

It's my understanding that when a building is destroyed by controlled demolition, the explosives are simply used to remove columns, not to 'pulverize' each floor of the building.

The columns are blown out, and then the rest of the destruction is left up to the power of gravity. AND IT WORKS ALMOST EVERY TIME!!

What is it about this concept that is so hard for some people to grasp?

I hate posting in these threads, but I always get a chuckle out of this too. It's as if some people think "controlled demolition" means "BLOW THE HELL OUT OF IT WITH LOTS OF BIG BOMBS!!"

 

[rwguinn]

I hate posting in these threads, but I always get a chuckle out of this too. It's as if some people think "controlled demolition" means "BLOW THE HELL OUT OF IT WITH LOTS OF BIG BOMBS!!"

YA..
I find it amusing that the CT's theory :
cutting collumns with explosives will generate pulverized concrete,
but
cutting collumns with large high-velocity aircraft will not generate pulverized concrete