0
Skyrad

Building 7 WTC

Recommended Posts

Quote

***Well, the answer is very simple. So simple, in fact, that the CT's don't accept it.
The reporting was done in the correct time frame, However, the background scene used behind the female reporter was filmed earlier in the day.
It is a technique used quite often in the broadcast industry. No magic fortune telling going on, no special insider information. Just bad choice of background video.



Quote

And I suppose the time stamp was pre recorded as well?



What time stamp would that be?
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

***Well, the answer is very simple. So simple, in fact, that the CT's don't accept it.
The reporting was done in the correct time frame, However, the background scene used behind the female reporter was filmed earlier in the day.
It is a technique used quite often in the broadcast industry. No magic fortune telling going on, no special insider information. Just bad choice of background video.



Quote

And I suppose the time stamp was pre recorded as well?



What time stamp would that be?



The time stamp on the recording.
Yes it is there on the BBC clip.

Amazingly it is missing on the supposed security tapes the gov;t attempted to pass off as the hijackers going through the airport.
Have you ever seen a security tape without a time stamp?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The reporting was done in the correct time frame, However, the background scene used behind the female reporter was filmed earlier in the day.
It is a technique used quite often in the broadcast industry.



I would tend to agree, but this was not background video taped earlier and then choma keyed in place of a green screen behind the reporter as they typically do for weather forecasts and other events.

At 1:13 in the video, the camera operator zooms into the background as the reporter is cut out of frame. If this was actual chroma keyed footage it would produce a very unnatural and bizzare effect because the video being keyed wil not respond to the actual camera zoom like the reporter because in reality there is no video to zoom into, just a green screen.

In order to correct this, you'd have to map the coordinates of the camera movement (zoom) and apply that data to the actual video being keyed so that it'll match. This is done in post production, not a live broadcast.

Even if this wasn't a live broadcast, it's extremely unlikely that they'd actually spend the time and money to motion map a couple second zoom in and zoom out. They'd be better off just leaving it as a static shot if this were the case.

Furthermore, if you look at the far left edge of the video, you can see a thin piece of glass that appears to be perpendicular to the window. This piece of glass is actually reflecting the brackdrop...you can even see a little glimpse of rising smoke being reflected near the beginning of her report. Again, it is very unlikely that they would take the time to create this trivial effect.

The best explanation is that is was a very hectic day filled with "sketchy details" and false reports...

It had been a major concern that WTC 7 would collapse hours before it actually did. It is likely that this information was miscommunicated.

Here is a good video that explains this was just another of many false reports on that chaotic day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T0PqzkFxso

If this had been footage recorded eariler that day, the BBC had plenty of opportunities to say so...
Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

So let me get this straight.., and I saw exactly what you are stating.
The top began to fall asymetricly but suddenly the entire structure below fell straight down as with no resistance.



The top did begin to fall asymmetrically, but it did impact the lower floors in a way that caused all of it to fail. That you can't see how the two are compatible is not a surprise. There is a lot of stuff in the scientific/engineering realm that isn't intuitive. That is why not just anyone can design a building, or analyze why or how it failed. No matter how much you want it to be something naturally analyzed by the seat of your pants, it is not.



So let me see if I am following you,
The top (the portion above the impact zone) began to fall over to the side but suddenly all that below it just fell straight down at near freefall speed .
Is that your take?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah yes, I missed those clues. Good eye!
Miscommunication is actually a simpler explanation than poor choice of background video.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm starting to think that I might have spent a little more time hanging out in burning buildings than you have-Thanks for the entertainment. You've saved me 8 bucks in netflicks sci fi rentals.



So Futuredivot, for all the time you;ve spent in burning buildings how many steel structured buildings have you witnessed falling straight down due to fire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

The buildings each fell in an orderly and structured collapse.



You and I apparently subscribe to different definitions of "orderly and structured" and I don't think reconciling our definitions is worth my time.

...plus it irritates the pig.



The videographer who shot the images captured a key detail.

Note those core colums still standing 47 or more stories even after the collapse.

Watch at about 16 secs into the video. does one fold over and then *shoot* away?

What force later brought them down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What force later brought them down?


Gravity, because they were probably barely stable they way they were, assuming it even happened as you saw in the vid
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What force later brought them down?


Gravity, because they were probably barely stable they way they were, assuming it even happened as you saw in the vid

Well look at the 16 second mark.


Does one not appear to fold over and then suddenly be blown straight out horizontaly several hundred feet ?

How would you reconcile that action with the theory that fire brought down the towers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I'm starting to think that I might have spent a little more time hanging out in burning buildings than you have-Thanks for the entertainment. You've saved me 8 bucks in netflicks sci fi rentals.



So Futuredivot, for all the time you;ve spent in burning buildings how many steel structured buildings have you witnessed falling straight down due to fire?



So just to review - when a fire fighter in a shitstorm makes a value judgement that proves to be wrong, you want to stick to his expert opinion.

But when it comes to how a super skyscrapper collapses, you only want to use your layman's knowledge of structural engineering. Check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm starting to think that I might have spent a little more time hanging out in burning buildings than you have-Thanks for the entertainment. You've saved me 8 bucks in netflicks sci fi rentals.



So Futuredivot, for all the time you;ve spent in burning buildings how many steel structured buildings have you witnessed falling straight down due to fire?



So just to review - when a fire fighter in a shitstorm makes a value judgement that proves to be wrong, you want to stick to his expert opinion.

***But when it comes to how a super skyscrapper collapses, you only want to use your layman's knowledge of structural engineering. Check.

not at all !
If you;ll read with comprehension instead of that "gotcha" as the goal you may notice that I do ask for futurevdivots first hand experienced obsevration.
What is your malfunction? Sorry if you've had a bad day.
I hope tommorrow is better.
Relax, get a drink of water, take a deep breath,relax!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

So let me get this straight.., and I saw exactly what you are stating.
The top began to fall asymetricly but suddenly the entire structure below fell straight down as with no resistance.



The top did begin to fall asymmetrically, but it did impact the lower floors in a way that caused all of it to fail. That you can't see how the two are compatible is not a surprise. There is a lot of stuff in the scientific/engineering realm that isn't intuitive. That is why not just anyone can design a building, or analyze why or how it failed. No matter how much you want it to be something naturally analyzed by the seat of your pants, it is not.



So let me see if I am following you,
The top (the portion above the impact zone) began to fall over to the side but suddenly all that below it just fell straight down at near freefall speed .
Is that your take?



What you've done is to describe it in a way that sounds implausible, at least to those that don't know what they don't know.

You did say it fell at near freefall, but how close to freefall was it?

How close to freefall have all the supposed engineers and scientists that support the conspiracy theory calculated that it should have fallen? If they have calculated it honestly, they would find that it matched what happened. Just because it isn't intuitive doesn't make it wrong. It would not fall ca-chunk ca-chunk like the lady on the loose change video assumed.

What part(s) of the conspiracy theory do you not believe? They make a log of assertions - things that don't "add up". Which of the assertions do you think do in fact "add up"?
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So let me get this straight.., and I saw exactly what you are stating.
The top began to fall asymetricly but suddenly the entire structure below fell straight down as with no resistance.



The top did begin to fall asymmetrically, but it did impact the lower floors in a way that caused all of it to fail. That you can't see how the two are compatible is not a surprise. There is a lot of stuff in the scientific/engineering realm that isn't intuitive. That is why not just anyone can design a building, or analyze why or how it failed. No matter how much you want it to be something naturally analyzed by the seat of your pants, it is not.



So let me see if I am following you,
The top (the portion above the impact zone) began to fall over to the side but suddenly all that below it just fell straight down at near freefall speed .
Is that your take?



What you've done is to describe it in a way that sounds implausible, at least to those that don't know what they don't know.

You did say it fell at near freefall, but how close to freefall was it?

How close to freefall have all the supposed engineers and scientists that support the conspiracy theory calculated that it should have fallen?
Quote



Before we go any further would you please refrain from refering to alternative theorists as "conspiracy theorists" as that term is somewhat confusing when attempting to dfifferrentiate between those who believe the main stream conspiracy theory and those who believe alternative conspiracy theories.
Whether you believe that 19 A-rabs with box cutters brought down the twinn towers or there was a planned demolition event each is a "conspiracy theory".

How about if in the future we agree to reference alternative theorists as ATs and the main stream believing theorists as MSs?

Will that work and can we agree to do that in an attempt to facilitate rational discussion of 9-11?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll call them Fred and Ethyl if that helps.

How about addressing the few simple questions I just posed to you a couple posts up?
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Call me. I'll explain the types of building collapses. Explain to you how steel expands and then contracts when it is cooled by fire hoses. I'll explain to you how girders being sheared at impact weakened the towers. I'll explain to you what that fire chief was thinking.
And I'll fill you in on the buildings that have fallen on me and how it happened, easily I might add.

signed,
31 years riding fire trucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If the fire was hot enough to melt steel how was he able to stand on that floor?



***The asst fire chief was overly optimistic. The fire wasn't hot enough to melt steel. It was hot enough to weaken it. It's strong enough right up until it isn't strong enough, and then it collapses.



So although you weren't there and he was on the floor and had been trained to asses fires and the requirements to place them under control and extinquish them, you discount his proffesional opinion?

Really?

Riddle me this Batman..;
If the fires were hot enough to "weaken" steel how could he have been standing on the same floor as the fire and would a trained firefighter be likely to confuse a fire capable of weakening steel with an office fire easily put out with a couple of hoses?



I think a few hundred people who jumped to their deaths rather than face the inferno any further disagreed with the assessment of a single trained professional.

I also understand that the fireman who uttered the words did not make it out alive and in one piece. I suspect that his assessment was a bit off...


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'll call them Fred and Ethyl if that helps.

***How about addressing the few simple questions I just posed to you a couple posts up?


A couple posts up your questions were rather confusing as you referenced "conspiracy theorist" engineers which as I've attempted to explain may be either main stream conspiracy accepting engineers or alternative conspiracy accepting engineers.
.

If you would please re submit the questions in terms which are more easily differentiated I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have concerning the events of 9-11.
I realize that those whobelieve in the main stream conspiracy theory have many questions as that theory simply does not add up and if you subtract to check your addition there are obviously missing integers.

So fire away!

I know all and I am here for you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
***Call me.
Quote

Well where is your number?

But really we can have a discussion here unless you are scared to speak in an open discussion forum.

So are you another guy who believes he knows more about the situation at the impact zone then the trained veteran firefighter on site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the fires were hot enough to "weaken" steel how could he have been standing on the same floor as the fire and would a trained firefighter be likely to confuse a fire capable of weakening steel with an office fire easily put out with a couple of hoses?



***I think a few hundred people who jumped to their deaths rather than face the inferno any further disagreed with the assessment of a single trained professional.

Quote

and I would argue conselor that those people did not leap soley due to the heat. Smoke was a more motivating factor!
As a matter of fact if the "inferno" was hot enough to melt steel those base jumpers would have been dead long before the count of three C-Ya !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Watch at about 16 secs into the video. does one fold over and then *shoot* away?



***No.

Quote


Really? youve watched the video you provided and don't see the steel member shoot horizontally at about the 16 second mark?

Maybe it is that you don't want to see it. It would only complicate your life.
Better to wear blinders and go about your buisiness.
That is understandable and Go!

I seek not your arms nor your counsel . Go home and bask in your percieved security.
May the chains of your servitude rest lightly on your shoulders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

A couple posts up your questions were rather confusing as you referenced "conspiracy theorist" engineers which as I've attempted to explain may be either main stream conspiracy accepting engineers or alternative conspiracy accepting engineers.
.

If you would please re submit the questions in terms which are more easily differentiated I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have concerning the evenys of 9-11.
I realize that those whobelieve in the main stream conspiracy theory have many questions as that theory simply does not add up and if you subtract to check your addition there are obviously missing integers.

So fire away!
I am here for you!



Resubmit? The questions are easily understood.

Swap whatever words you want and just address the questions. If you're able to differentiate, and subtract to check your addition, then you can do that.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Watch at about 16 secs into the video. does one fold over and then *shoot* away?



It appears to fold over, but I would not describe it as "shooting away". It does not look remarkable. Many dynamic interactions still at work.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0