He's talking about when you claimed that the people who claim to have demolitions experience are imposters.
Okay, I retract that comment. Impostor wasn't the right word. I apologize.
What I mean to say is that any demo expert who says that the trade center towers could NOT have been brought down via controlled demolition is either a CD expert wannabee, or one without the necessary skillset to pull it off.
Again, you have to remember that the only science that fits the laws of the universe that we have all lived with since they were calculated, is in support of controlled demolition. If a controlled demolition guy or gal cannot see that, they should return to school or gain more experience.... or find another job.
It's about the science Tricks. It's not that hard to figure out.
The armchair blaster speaks!
You lost this one awhile ago,carry on emberassing yourself and your "movement"
Zigmiester....coming to a town near you soon.
ziggy
CKA Uber
Posts: 19370
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 1:51 pm
FireEmUp wrote:
Forums like this should be printed and saved to pass on from generation to generation, because when the truth finally is a global acceptance, our grand children should see the fight people like me had to go through to awaken people like you.
My childrens children will be proud of their history. Will yours?
Hopefully if you do have children they will be able to think for themselves and not be one of Jone's sheep.They may even bring you a lunch and take you for supervised walks at the nuthouse.
Zigmiester....coming to a town near you soon.
DrCaleb
Forum Elite
Posts: 1829
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 1:59 pm
FireEmUp wrote:
What I mean to say is that any demo expert who says that the trade center towers could NOT have been brought down via controlled demolition is either a CD expert wannabee, or one without the necessary skillset to pull it off.
Any demo expert will tell you anything can be brought down with a large enough explosion, or series of explosions. But, that's called 'Appeal from Authority'. A classic logical fallacy.
FireEmUp wrote:
Again, you have to remember that the only science that fits the laws of the universe that we have all lived with since they were calculated, is in support of controlled demolition. If a controlled demolition guy or gal cannot see that, they should return to school or gain more experience.... or find another job.
Trouble is, science is what tells us none of the WYC buildings were brought down by demolition, but by structural failure cause by unprecedented physical damage.
Are you seriously trying to say that people we have on this forum who use explosives regularly to demolish things have not enough experience to compare to your long, distinguished career as a demolitions expert?
FireEmUp wrote:
It's about the science Tricks. It's not that hard to figure out.
One the contrary, inelastic collisions are very hard to figure out.
Blue_Nose
CKA Uber
Posts: 13767
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:15 pm
FireEmUp wrote:
It's about the science Tricks. It's not that hard to figure out.
Yeah, Tricks, what's hard to imagine about someone secretly installing thousands of demolition charges throughout at least three huge buildings without raising any suspicion beforehand, flying planes into two of them as a distraction, allowing the ensuing fires to burn for hours (without disrupting the charges), using thermite to 'cut' through vertical steel columns at random locations for good measure, but then destroying every single structural support precisely as collapse progressed from the top down to allow them to "free fall" in a manner that is apparently physically impossible.
Even if you believe all this was possible, what's hard to believe about such a precisely and ridiculously convoluted plan being so easily revealed by a bunch of people sitting in their homes watching videos and looking at photos on the internet, without anyone actually involved in the plan coming forward and offering any actual proof?
That's SCIENCE, Tricks, forget about all that engineering crap.
Last edited by Blue_Nose on Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
FireEmUp
Active Member
Posts: 138
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:15 pm
DrCaleb wrote:
Any demo expert will tell you anything can be brought down with a large enough explosion, or series of explosions. But, that's called 'Appeal from Authority'. A classic logical fallacy.
Fair enough.
DrCaleb wrote:
Trouble is, science is what tells us none of the WYC buildings were brought down by demolition, but by structural failure cause by unprecedented physical damage.
The problem is, the damage location and amount does not fit the actual collapse. It is physically impossible for what happened to have happened with the damage that it suffered.
You can propose a theory of how all 3 buildings all you want, but you have to find evidence to support it and what's harder than that, it has to fit the facts... and by all means has to remain within the confines of the laws of the universe. If it does not, it is not a valid theory.
DrCaleb wrote:
Are you seriously trying to say that people we have on this forum who use explosives regularly to demolish things have not enough experience to compare to your long, distinguished career as a demolitions expert?
I'm not comparing anything to me. I'm merely stating that if a CD expert cannot identify a controlled demolition (especially with building 7), then they have never witnessed a demolition of a building before. It's that simple.
They may blow things up, but so does anyone with a hand grenade and a will to use it. That doesn't mean they are experts.
Not me. Them. This is not about me. I'm just relaying fact.
You might actually believe that, but you aren't. You are relaying opinion, and using it as supporting fact. Big difference.
Read the pages. The buildings were not demolished, as demolition leaves visible and physical evidence, of which none is present.
It's been hashed, and rehashed throughout these 170 odd pages. All has been revealed, if you would only read.
Blue_Nose
CKA Uber
Posts: 13767
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:26 pm
DrCaleb wrote:
It's been hashed, and rehashed throughout these 170 odd pages. All has been revealed, if you would only read.
It'll be the same thing as it has always been - he's only here to "reveal" the truth to us, and isn't interested in any debate of any specific topic.
Stick something specific to these guys and they will automatically shift to something else - the goal is to get as many points in as possible to distract you from the fact that they can't really substantiate any one of them.
FireEmUp
Active Member
Posts: 138
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:38 pm
Wow. I can't believe how much you people just do not know. Let me break this diatribe down for you...
Blue_Nose wrote:
Yeah, Tricks, what's hard to imagine about someone secretly installing thousands of demolition charges throughout at least three huge buildings without raising any suspicion beforehand
This could easily have been done. The places that needed explosives would be in restricted areas. Therefor a very few would have even had the chance to notice.
Furthermore, one does not have to explain such things as 'how the bombs got in there' to recognize that bombs HAD to be in there.
Blue_Nose wrote:
, flying planes into two of them as a distraction,
Yes, as a distraction and to have something to show repeatedly to push the public further into a state of shock (which, you must be still under).
Also, if they did not use planes, they would have had to explain how the bombs were able to get in there without detection. They were indeed, as you say, a distraction. Everyone knows that a plane smashing into an engineering wonder such as the trade center cannot completely pulverize it.
Blue_Nose wrote:
allowing the ensuing fires to burn for hours (without disrupting the charges),
First of all, the south tower suffered complete global failure 57 minutes after it was struck and the north tower (which was actually hit first) crumbled after 1 hour and 35 minutes.
It was not hours. Not even 2.
Furthermore, it is theoretically possible that the charges were disrupted in the South Tower, which could very well be the reason why it fell first. Who knows.
Blue_Nose wrote:
using thermite to 'cut' through vertical steel columns at random locations for good measure,
No no, for good controlled demolition. How else would would demolish 47 huge central columns that spanned the entirety of the building? Oh right, have a plan damage a few floors close to the top and wait for the laws of nature to suspend for just a few hours.
Blue_Nose wrote:
but then destroying every single structural support precisely as collapse progressed from the top down to allow them to "free fall".
Near free fall.
I find it hilarious that you have a hard time believing that, but you somehow believe that a small amount of mass (as compared the the 90 or so floors that were not hit by a plane) was able to fall through a very large amount of mass (again, the bottom 90 floors).
Mass falls in the path of least resistance. The building below the impact zone is NOT the path of least resistance. It really isn't that hard to grasp.
Blue_Nose wrote:
Even if you believe all this was possible, what's hard to believe about such a precisely and ridiculously convoluted plan being so easily revealed by a bunch of people sitting in their homes watching videos and looking at photos on the internet, without anyone actually involved in the plan coming forward and offering any actual proof?
Again, you are mistaken. The evidence that I am sharing is coming from military professionals, US congress-people, Ex-FBI officials, Ex-Cia, physics professors, architects, engineers and the people brave enough to research it further.
Me, I am nothing without them. I just need to pass it on because the mainstream media is controlled by the very people who did this. They will not tell you the facts. It is up for us, people like me, to inform.
The thing is, when you do wake up, you will do the same.
Blue_Nose wrote:
That's SCIENCE, Tricks, forget about all that engineering crap.
You've removed science from your thought process long ago, so it seems.
People lie. The laws of physics, nature and the universe... Do not.
You believe that the laws of the universe were suspended for one day with regards to the towers.
No, we do not.
That's why the conspiracists' arguments are wrong.
Tell us why seismographs didn't pick up an explosion on 9/11 if there was a demolition? Were the laws of the universe suspended for the transfer of thermal energy into the ground when the explosion supposedly occurred?
Those buildings were expertly demolished by controlled demolition. There is nothing else possible. Either you accept it or you don't. Those who don't will have their children of the future ask "How could you not see it for so long?".
I can't wait to see what excuse you come up with then.
How controlled demolitions work.
Quote:
Demolition blasters load explosives on several different levels of the building so that the building structure falls down on itself at multiple points. When everything is planned and executed correctly, the total damage of the explosives and falling building material is sufficient to collapse the structure entirely, so cleanup crews are left with only a pile of rubble.
In order to demolish a building safely, blasters must map out each element of the implosion ahead of time. The first step is to examine architectural blueprints of the building, if they can be located, to determine how the building is put together. Next, the blaster crew tours the building (several times), jotting down notes about the support structure on each floor. Once they have gathered all the raw data they need, the blasters hammer out a plan of attack. Drawing from past experiences with similar buildings, they decide what explosives to use, where to position them in the building and how to time their detonations. In some cases, the blasters may develop 3-D computer models of the structure so they can test out their plan ahead of time in a virtual world.
Sometimes, though, a building is surrounded by structures that must be preserved. In this case, the blasters proceed with a true implosion, demolishing the building so that it collapses straight down into its own footprint (the total area at the base of the building). This feat requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it.
Generally speaking, blasters will explode the major support columns on the lower floors first and then a few upper stories. In a 20-story building, for example, the blasters might blow the columns on the first and second floor, as well as the 12th and 15th floors. In most cases, blowing the support structures on the lower floors is sufficient for collapsing the building, but loading columns on upper floors helps break the building material into smaller pieces as it falls. This makes for easier cleanup following the blast.
Once the blasters have figured out how to set up an implosion, it's time to prepare the building. In the next section, we'll find out what's involved in pre-detonation prepping and see how blasters rig the explosives for a precisely timed demolition.
In the last section, we saw how blasters plan out a building implosion. Once they have a clear idea of how the structure should fall, it's time to prepare the building. The first step in preparation, which often begins before the blasters have actually surveyed the site, is to clear any debris out of the building. Next, construction crews, or, more accurately, destruction crews, begin taking out non-load-bearing walls within the building. This makes for a cleaner break at each floor: If these walls were left intact, they would stiffen the building, hindering its collapse. Destruction crews may also weaken the supporting columns with sledge hammers or steel-cutters, so that they give way more easily.
Next, blasters can start loading the columns with explosives. Blasters use different explosives for different materials, and determine the amount of explosives needed based on the thickness of the material. For concrete columns, blasters use traditional dynamite or a similar explosive material. Dynamite is just absorbent stuffing soaked in a highly combustible chemical or mixture of chemicals. When the chemical is ignited, it burns quickly, producing a large volume of hot gas in a short amount of time. This gas expands rapidly, applying immense outward pressure (up to 600 tons per square inch) on whatever is around it. Blasters cram this explosive material into narrow bore holes drilled in the concrete columns. When the explosives are ignited, the sudden outward pressure sends a powerful shock wave busting through the column at supersonic speed, shattering the concrete into tiny chunks.
Demolishing steel columns is a bit more difficult, as the dense material is much stronger. For buildings with a steel support structure, blasters typically use the specialized explosive material cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine, called RDX for short. RDX-based explosive compounds expand at a very high rate of speed, up to 27,000 feet per second (8,230 meters per second). Instead of disintegrating the entire column, the concentrated, high-velocity pressure slices right through the steel, splitting it in half. Additionally, blasters may ignite dynamite on one side of the column to push it over in a particular direction.
Wow, that sure sounds like a helluva a lot of work. Oh, but I'm sure all that's needed is 36 hours for large amounts of people to come into a building virtually undetected to demolish one of the largest structures on the planet.
What I mean to say is that any demo expert who says that the trade center towers could NOT have been brought down via controlled demolition is either a CD expert wannabee, or
AARRRGHHH!
Protec services, a world-renowned demolition consulting firm, wrote a paper debunking the claims of what you just said. THEY ARE EXPERTS! I just posted it a few pages back. Here it is again!
You believe that the laws of the universe were suspended for one day with regards to the towers.
No, we do not.
That's why the conspiracists' arguments are wrong.
Tell us why seismographs didn't pick up an explosion on 9/11 if there was a demolition? Were the laws of the universe suspended for the transfer of thermal energy into the ground when the explosion supposedly occurred?
You are trying to entrap me.
Quit ignoring what I've already said. It is impossible to have happened the way they say it happened. Physically impossible. There is no argument. There is no need to talk about what they don't have. Let's talk about what is there. Stop ignoring it.
Wow, that sure sounds like a helluva a lot of work. Oh, but I'm sure all that's needed is 36 hours for large amounts of people to come into a building virtually undetected to demolish one of the largest structures on the planet.
First of all, nobody said it was only 36 hours that it took to set up. Who knows how much time they took. After all, it would have, again, been very easy to keep most of the people out of the areas the charges needed to go. The security system would have taken care of that.
Secondly, you truly have no idea what a few men can do. If you're a Canadian, all you gotta tell em is that there's beer waiting when their done and it'll be done nickity split.
Explaining how long it takes to do something does not refute the evidence I put forward. Remember that.
Science. Stick to science. Laws of gravity. Motion. You know, the stuff we have no control over and must succumb too.
What you're talking about is mindless drivel designed to shift focus from the hard facts. It's a tactic and it's easy to see.
What I mean to say is that any demo expert who says that the trade center towers could NOT have been brought down via controlled demolition is either a CD expert wannabee, or
AARRRGHHH!
Protec services, a world-renowned demolition consulting firm, wrote a paper debunking the claims of what you just said. THEY ARE EXPERTS! I just posted it a few pages back. Here it is again!
CKA Uber 
Forum Elite 
Forum Super Elite 
