Hey Mr. Mainstream media, why don't you take a look at this. And if you have any questions. I will be more than happy to answer them. Keep in mind, MR. know it all, there is a long history behind this.
9/11 Fourteen Years Later
- Thread starter danmand
- Start date
Dumbest thing you have posted yet. The gravitational energy in a building is sufficient for all what happened.
But again:
Your initial conspiracy claims were proven false, your sources shown to be bullshit artists.
You and your links have no credibility.
You are done.
This is progress, you learned and understood something.
Now we'll have to apply it.
Who gave you the authority to discredit guys who talk about Newton's 3rd Law, guys are explain the physics and laws of thermodynamics?
Who are you to simply brush them off as though they don't know what they're talking about?
NIST had to change their story to TRY and make it fit their narrative. lol
No, they were hit by planes.
Ok.
LOL please, enlighten us. I can't WAIT to hear this.
Just because you say so, it's that simple eh? lol
And btw, no they're not discredited because they are experts, they do understand engineering and physics.
But because they don't agree with the SCIENTIFIC facts, you don't like it.
Please, show me where. You're just going bananas with the "you this, you that, your sources" now.
It's almost like you lost your mind and are getting more upset. Surprised you didn't call me a twit again.
No, it's not over.
Please explain how Newton's 3rd Law is not relevant here.
You are a certified masochist. Why don't you hire a lady to spank you good? Would that not be more fun than to argue with fucky?This is progress, you learned and understood something.
Now we'll have to apply it.
Who gave you the authority to discredit guys who talk about Newton's 3rd Law, guys are explain the physics and laws of thermodynamics?
Who are you to simply brush them off as though they don't know what they're talking about?
NIST had to change their story to TRY and make it fit their narrative. lol
No, they were hit by planes.
Ok.
LOL please, enlighten us. I can't WAIT to hear this.
Just because you say so, it's that simple eh? lol
And btw, no they're not discredited because they are experts, they do understand engineering and physics.
But because they don't agree with the SCIENTIFIC facts, you don't like it.
Please, show me where. You're just going bananas with the "you this, you that, your sources" now.
It's almost like you lost your mind and are getting more upset. Surprised you didn't call me a twit again.
No, it's not over.
Please explain how Newton's 3rd Law is not relevant here.
Your claim the direction of impact should have had some effect on the direction the tower fell, which is pure nonsense. The effect the plane had was to start a fire. The kinetic energy of the impact itself was irrelevant, the building absorbed the impact and remained standing. It was designed to, and it did. In fact it remained standing long enough to complete an evacuation, and in that sense met its engineering goals. Unfortunately the fire that consumed the entire floor PREVENTED evacuation, but had there been an open stairwell the structure remained intact long enough everyone could have gotten out, and below the impact they mostly did get out.This is progress, you learned and understood something.
Now we'll have to apply it.
Who gave you the authority to discredit guys who talk about Newton's 3rd Law, guys are explain the physics and laws of thermodynamics?
Who are you to simply brush them off as though they don't know what they're talking about?
NIST had to change their story to TRY and make it fit their narrative. lol
No, they were hit by planes.
Ok.
LOL please, enlighten us. I can't WAIT to hear this.
Just because you say so, it's that simple eh? lol
And btw, no they're not discredited because they are experts, they do understand engineering and physics.
But because they don't agree with the SCIENTIFIC facts, you don't like it.
Please, show me where. You're just going bananas with the "you this, you that, your sources" now.
It's almost like you lost your mind and are getting more upset. Surprised you didn't call me a twit again.
No, it's not over.
Please explain how Newton's 3rd Law is not relevant here.
It was the fire, started by burning jet fuel, that eventually weakened the structure causing the floor suspended from the exoskeleton to break loose from the structure and fall. There is only one direction things fall: down. It fell onto the weakened floor below it and they both fell, knocking the third floor off and picking up mass and energy as it fell, also further damaging the exoskeleton causing the whole thing to collapse and the entire building above to fall.
That much falling mass destroyed everything in its path, including the exoskeleton and the central columns.
But the debate ended before we got to this point. It ended when your claim that the building fell in a controlled demolition way was to totally refuted.
Video everyone can watch showed that it did not fall that way, the top above the impact site fell into the bottom and crushed it.
That refuted your theory and by implication destroyed the credibility of your sources.
You have no way to recover from that. Your claim is based on not trusting the official report but your alternative sources, fake experts on YouTube, were shown to be bullshit artists. You can't use them anymore.
You can't claim that they are a big fraud on that topic but somehow trustworthy on some other. Which means all you blogs and YouTube videos should now just be ignored, actually laughed at, owing to the complete lack of credibility they have.
In losing that point you lost the debate.
it is true.. some people simply just REFUSE to acknowledge reality..
or a more accurate statement would be..
deep down inside they know something is terribly wrong
(you can see it in their demeanor as they desperately scramble to explain away and rationalize)
yet they refuse to allow themselves to acknowledge specific realities for whatever reason (fear, apathy, pride, etc.)..
Oh so now you've appointed yourself the judge of this debate LOL Fugi don't make me laugh. That statement alone shows how full of yourself you are
Absolutely. You two jokers claimed there was a controlled demolition with explosions around the ground floor, but you were proved definitively wrong with public evidence that everyone can easily see and understand.
How do you come back from that? It shows your fake YouTube experts were bullshit artists, it reveals you were completely ignorant about even the design of the building, and it destroys what WAS your primary claim.
Now you want to run around throwing out new allegations? Still based on these internet bullshit artists?
You are acting the part of a clown.
Wait what?
Experts say that there's no way that jet fuel (fires) alone could do that much damage and bring down the buildings.
Lol
Fuji, Fuji, Fuji, geez man.
Please again, enlighten us, how is Newton's 3rd law "not relevant" here?
You seem to be the resident physics expert.
Those "YouTube experts" are simply professionals recorded on video and put online. Simply because they're not on the corporate controlled mainstream media does not and should not take away their credentials or merit.
Again, Newton's 3rd Law, why does it not apply to the portions of the buildings above the impact zones?
These are laws of motion, the basics of physics.
Bingo!
The floors well beneath the impact zone should have caused resistance and therefore the speed of the collapse would not have been at NEAR freefall speed.
So clearly something had to help the building implode and it certainly wasn't jet fuel fires causing a massive collapse.
The pancake theory doesn't apply because that would imply a mass with force upon another mass with force, Newton's 3rd law, something Fuji says is not relevant in this case.
Waiting to hear how Fuji's 1st Law on how he's right in that Newton's 3rd law doesn't apply.
My only problem is that the central core was independent of the exoskeleton and very strong, yet it collapsed down too without causing the top part from tilting due to any resistance.
On the tenth anniversary of the Attacks of September 11th, 2001, expert witnesses gathered at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada to provide evidence-based research that called into question the official story of 9/11.
This was known as The Toronto Hearings on 9/11.Over a period of four days, these experts in Structural Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, and History gave researched and professional testimony to an international panel of distinguished judges.
The panel of judges, in conjunction with the steering committee would go on to publish their final analysis of the evidence provided, which called for a new investigation into the Attacks of September 11th, 2001.
This film is a summary of the strongest evidence given over the four days of hearings. To see the hearings in their entirety please visit http://torontohearings.org/ or read the final report available on the aforementioned website.
This was known as The Toronto Hearings on 9/11.Over a period of four days, these experts in Structural Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, and History gave researched and professional testimony to an international panel of distinguished judges.
The panel of judges, in conjunction with the steering committee would go on to publish their final analysis of the evidence provided, which called for a new investigation into the Attacks of September 11th, 2001.
This film is a summary of the strongest evidence given over the four days of hearings. To see the hearings in their entirety please visit http://torontohearings.org/ or read the final report available on the aforementioned website.
I'm sorry but what the f*ck are you talking about ? Newton's 3rd law doesn't apply an hour, 6 hours or one week after an event - is describes a real time effect. Newton's 3rd law has no relevance an hour after the airplane collision any more than the Pythagorean theorem of triangle. Both theories aren't suspended - they just has no relevance why the building fell.
Let me try to explain ... "Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects."
1) Your car drives into a tree and the tree is left standing .... the force will be instantaneous and immediately crumple your car - you don't walk away and an hour later energy of the impact suddenly crumples your car.
2) You hit a golf ball with a golf club - Newtons 3rd law accounts for the instantaneous flight of the ball as the energy accelerates the ball proportional to the energy of the swinging club. You don't swing ... hit the ball and one or two days later the ball suddenly accelerates off the ground.
Newtons 3rd law applied to the moment the airplane hit the building. The jet was shredded by the impact, the building moved back and forth transferring energy into shock waves that moved up and down the building but like the tree with your car ... the building absorbed the energy of the airplane. Newton's 3rd law is accommodated and over.
So please stop suggesting the airplane or Newton's 3rd law has some magical influence an hour after the impact.
Burning building ...30 minutes later ... burning building. Now set off your explosives, phantom bazooka shots, acts of God .. but don't start rewinding time for Newton's 3rd law energy effects. Or is a time machine the latest part of the conspiracy theory - I've lost track.
I'll keep this very short, sweet and to the point.....
So the floors below the impact zones had ZERO resistance all the way down? COMPLETELY NONE? Guessing so since a 110 story building apparently disintegrated into powder, a world's first no doubt.
Ever see demolitions on TV or YouTube (Fuji's favorite), see don't see buildings pulverized into dust like the Twin Towers.
You can hit a golf ball today or in two days, the 3rd law still applies, the moment that ball is met with force, it has force to return.
In a year's time, when Tiger Woods hits a ball, that 3rd law will apply.
When you get up from your seat to go to bed tonight, that 3rd law will apply. (when you're walking and pushing off the floor)
So the floors below the impact zones had ZERO resistance all the way down? COMPLETELY NONE? Guessing so since a 110 story building apparently disintegrated into powder, a world's first no doubt.
Ever see demolitions on TV or YouTube (Fuji's favorite), see don't see buildings pulverized into dust like the Twin Towers.
You can hit a golf ball today or in two days, the 3rd law still applies, the moment that ball is met with force, it has force to return.
In a year's time, when Tiger Woods hits a ball, that 3rd law will apply.
When you get up from your seat to go to bed tonight, that 3rd law will apply. (when you're walking and pushing off the floor)
I believe Tesla was referring to the downward force of the building impacting on the lower 2/3 or half of the building, not the impact of the plane on the building.
The downward force met resistance by motionless floors. However, the argument is that those lower floors offered little resistance as their connections to the exoskeleton sheared off under the enormous weight (gravity).
However, with respect to that video lesson, the instructor did say that there can be a net force that overwhelms.
Also, Fuji talked about the unique building design wherein the floor trusses hung from the exterior walls. I did some research and found that the floor trusses were merely connected by 5/8" bolts, although NIST later revised their statements that the floor trusses also had cross members for greater stability to avoid sagging under weight of the light-weight concrete floor as well as the interior contents.
While I can't say for sure, the counter-argument is that they did have resistance, but little resistance (hung from exoskeleton but with only 5/8" bolts, and the connections might have weakened over the years since the original construction) due to structural failure.
There were not supported by interior columns.
The only lingering question I have is what about the internal or central core? It was not suspended to the exoskeleton. It did connect floor between it and the exterior wall. You would think that the central core would not come down as easily. That's my dilemma.
