• Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
  • FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!

do you believe 911 was an inside job

According to the NIST web site it was not a free fall. You are quote mining by not including the entire context.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 2.pdf).
The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:
• Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
• Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
• Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

Stage 2 right there is all you need to see.

FREE FALL. You cannot get pure FREE FALL without explosives PERIOD!
 

TheOrangeCat

AFK..being taken to the vet to get neutered.
Stage 2 right there is all you need to see.

FREE FALL. You cannot get pure FREE FALL without explosives PERIOD!

What is wrong with you? Seriously, you have just made - and this is quite an achievement - your stupidest, most cringe-making, lie and delusion-filled post in your time here.

How the hell can you read that line from the NIST report and say it proves your point?

It does the precise, exact opposite.

It says the collapse was:


40% SLOWER than the free fall time

Let me try and explain this in the simplest terms. The NIST report is saying that is it were free fall, it would have taken 3.9 seconds. But in this case it took 5.4 seconds, or 40% longer to fall than free fall time.

Is that simple enough for you to understand now, or shall I do a sock puppet play to illustrate the point further?

Just because there was a three second of window where free fall speeds were achieved, does not mean the collapse was free fall. You are - as usual - taking a fragment and trying to make a whole with it.

You are just humiliating yourself now.
 

Facetious

Moderated
Re: do you believe 911 was an inside job

I believe that nothing would surprise me if, at a future date, the real official government side of the story was found to be less that the whole truth, the only truth, so help me God! I mean, come on, the government is notorious for giving us half truths about events of significant importance, what's so surprising about that?

I only have questions about some of the events related to September 11, 2001, does that qualify me as being a ''conspiracy nut'' for being cynical about my govt.?

Question Authority . . Always Question Authority!
 
Stage 2 right there is all you need to see.

FREE FALL. You cannot get pure FREE FALL without explosives PERIOD!


According to the NIST web site it was not a free fall. You are quote mining by not including the entire context.

During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.


Your research skills are on a High School level. It clearly states the reason for a short time period of free fall during the collapse. And its not an explosion. Stop cherry picking misleading quotes to make a point.
 
What is wrong with you? Seriously, you have just made - and this is quite an achievement - your stupidest, most cringe-making, lie and delusion-filled post in your time here.

How the hell can you read that line from the NIST report and say it proves your point?

It does the precise, exact opposite.

It says the collapse of the North Face was:

Let me try and explain this in the simplest terms. The NIST report is saying that is it were free fall, it would have taken 3.9 seconds. But in this case it took 5.4 seconds, or 40% longer to fall than free fall time.

Is that simple enough for you to understand now, or shall I do a sock puppet play to illustrate the point further?

You are just humiliating yourself now.

No actually the humiliation is on you.

At any point of the collapse if the building as a whole went into FULL free fall collapse, that is falling at the speed of gravity with NO RESISTANCE, meaning no building support columns breaking the fall for even a second, you have to have explosives used.

Have you watched demolitions gone wrong. They plan and plan and place explosives for months at a time to try get it right. Then on the big day everyone is watching, poof if a mistake is make and the charges don't go off precisely at the right time the building will still stand or topple over dangerously onto other buildings. And you believe the uniform free fall collapse of Building 7 happened by chance? COME ON!!

Here is a failed demolition for you in case you haven't watched one before.



Now here is Building 7. Perfect demo job.

 

Facetious

Moderated
Your research skills are on a High School level. It clearly states the reason for a short time period of free fall during the collapse. And its not an explosion. Stop cherry picking misleading quotes to make a point.

At ease, YMI, he's in good company with the Obama cabinet appointee / extremist left winger Van Jones . . .
''Bush knew!'' :D


Aside - What happened to flight 93, was that blown out of the sky like I think it might have been?
Wasn't the debris field much much longer than what a jetliner of it's size would have been if it really crashed intact? . . . .like two friggin miles in length?

Just asking is all. :dunno:
 

TheOrangeCat

AFK..being taken to the vet to get neutered.
Interestingly, for someone so offended and contemptuous of journalists and their coverage of the attacks, you are almost prodigious in your fulfillment of a treasured journalism maxim:

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Kudos. Your demented posts are better fiction than anything I've ever bought from Amazon.
 
This crap is still going on :dunno: WTC7waspulled is an idiot.. you cannot achieve free fall without explosives= dumbest/ most ignorant thing I've ever heard, you people should just stop arguing with him, he's already proven himself to be unwilling to listen to reason, if you stop arguing with him then he'll have no one to preach his bullcrap to.
 
Re: do you believe 911 was an inside job

I believe that nothing would surprise me if, at a future date, the real official government side of the story was found to be less that the whole truth, the only truth, so help me God! I mean, come on, the government is notorious for giving us half truths about events of significant importance, what's so surprising about that?

I only have questions about some of the events related to September 11, 2001, does that qualify me as being a ''conspiracy nut'' for being cynical about my govt.?

Question Authority . . Always Question Authority!

:thumbsup: and green rep /
 
This crap is still going on :dunno: WTC7waspulled is an idiot.. you cannot achieve free fall without explosives= dumbest/ most ignorant thing I've ever heard, you people should just stop arguing with him, he's already proven himself to be unwilling to listen to reason, if you stop arguing with him then he'll have no one to preach his bullcrap to.

I love it. You sit there and tell me that hi rise buildings can collapse with no resistance at freefall speed without explosives (totally wrong) and you name call and give no argument or anything whatsoever to back up your claim.

Hey tell me how all support columns for WTC7 suddenly disappeared to allow for the free fall uniform collapse into it's own footprint. I really want to know.
 

TheOrangeCat

AFK..being taken to the vet to get neutered.
I love it. You sit there and tell me that hi rise buildings can collapse with no resistance at freefall speed without explosives (totally wrong) and you name call and give no argument or anything whatsoever to back up your claim.

Hey tell me how all support columns for WTC7 suddenly disappeared to allow for the free fall uniform collapse into it's own footprint. I really want to know.

It didn't freefall

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm
 

I don't make duplicate accounts. Seems you have a hard time believing many can be on board with 9/11 Truth. Well polls show people like you are quickly becoming a minority. The world is waking up to the fact 9/11 was an inside job and the whole "war on terror" is actually a war against anyone opposed to a New World Order.
 

TheOrangeCat

AFK..being taken to the vet to get neutered.
I don't make duplicate accounts. Seems you have a hard time believing many can be on board with 9/11 Truth. Well polls show people like you are quickly becoming a minority. The world is waking up to the fact 9/11 was an inside job and the whole "war on terror" is actually a war against anyone opposed to a New World Order.

1. Don't believe you (how odd)
2. You peddle lies.
3. No we're not
4. No it isn't
5. No it wasn't
6. There's no such thing


It didn't freefall

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/f..._qa_082108.cfm
 
Top