440,812 Members | 856 Online
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 440,812 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

# Looks like the "conspiracy theories" really were true after all...

 P: n/a Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came crashing down on the day of 9/11. The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329 There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report. Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed? If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the demolitions industry! How do we know WTC 7 was demolished? If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall. This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT! PROPOSITION 1: It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical, http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329 Collapse start time: 17 seconds Collapse end time: 23 seconds Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds PROPOSITION 2: A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6 seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean) kinematical considerations alone: Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration * total time^2 or s = ut + 1/2at^2 where s = 174 m (height of building) u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse) a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at a constant) Thus, 174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2 Solving for t t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8) = 5.9590 ~ 6 seconds Oct 20 '07 #1
7 Replies

 P: n/a On Oct 19, 8:02 pm, schoenfeld....@gmail.com wrote: Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came crashing down on the day of 9/11. The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329 There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report. Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed? If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the demolitions industry! How do we know WTC 7 was demolished? If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall. This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT! PROPOSITION 1: It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical, http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329 Collapse start time: 17 seconds Collapse end time: 23 seconds Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds PROPOSITION 2: A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6 seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean) kinematical considerations alone: Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration * total time^2 or s = ut + 1/2at^2 where s = 174 m (height of building) u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse) a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at a constant) Thus, 174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2 Solving for t t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8) = 5.9590 ~ 6 seconds Die. Oct 20 '07 #2

 P: n/a take your meds dildo

 P: n/a sc************@gmail.com wrote: :: Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which :: came crashing down on the day of 9/11. :: :: The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here :: :: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329 :: :: Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed? No, but standing next to two collapsing towers JUST might. :-) Sigh! Bo Persson Oct 20 '07 #4

 P: n/a sc************@gmail.com wrote: This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT! Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracy theorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that. Oct 20 '07 #5

 P: n/a Hello, Juha Nieminen wrote: sc************@gmail.com wrote: >This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it didso without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLEDDEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT! Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracy theorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that. Surely, but I saw at a tv show that the steel of the destroyed building was twisted in a way only a controlled detonation could accomplish that. There are still too many inconsistencies and what did Bush dealed out with the Bin Ladens as they were in the USA at this time? Or fact is that the WTC wasn't very profitable. It caused a lot of costs. Days before the attack, people reported that on some floors they suddendly worked with heavy machines on the outer walls and access was forbitten to these floors.... However, one can think what they want, but my thought is that we only know the tip of the iceberg. It was always the plan to monitor the citizens and now they have an alibi to to do it. A good coincidence, isn't it?. Whereby I'm already sick of this stupid terrorism lies in our media all around the world. Every politician in the modern industry nations uses this terrorism lie to monitor us more and more and the people and believe all this crap. I didn't investigate but I guess that nowadays are not more terrorism attacks in the whole world as before 2001. All this terrorism crap is built up by our media. Even here in Austria where I live, politicians here use these terrorism climate to try to make laws to be allowed to spy out home computers although we never had any terrorism problems in our small country. Moreover I wonder how stupid a terrorist must be to doesn't find a way to avoid those computer monitoring crap. Oct 22 '07 #6

 P: n/a Markus Pitha wrote: > Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracytheorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that. Surely, but I saw at a tv show that the steel of the destroyed building was twisted in a way only a controlled detonation could accomplish that. Yes, because a random "tv show" is more reliable than the word of countless professionals in the field of demolition. Everything they say on TV must be true. It was always the plan to monitor the citizens and now they have an alibi to to do it. A good coincidence, isn't it?. Ah yes, the good old "they got a good excuse to reduce privacy, so the whole thing must have been staged". Whether or not such an event is used for political purposes is in no way proof about it being staged. Oct 24 '07 #7

 P: n/a In article <47**********************@news.song.fi>, Juha Nieminen

### This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.