Simplest Proof Yet for WTC Demolition
If the top 15 stories of WTC1 were strong enough to drive through the lower 95 stories of the tower and induce its total collapse, we should see these top 15 stories sitting intact atop the rubble of WTC1.
By the same token, if the top 30 stories of WTC2 were strong enough to drive through the lower 80 stories of the tower and induce its total collapse, we should see these top 30 stories sitting intact atop the rubble of WTC2.
This is not unlike the proof for no plane hitting the WTC: if the plane was strong enough to punch out a silhouette shape of itself in the side of the WTC, it can't be completely destroyed by the same structure.
An object simply CAN'T completely destroy something and be completely destroyed itself.
And an explosive device is a completely different situation than a solid object colliding with another solid object.
UPDATE: One might argue that the upper floors of the WTC did drive the collapse of the tower staying intact and then only broke apart once it reached the ground. However, this notion is belied by the fact that all videos of the WTC "collapses" show the upper stories collapsing in on themselves (and off the side) at the same time the lower portions of the towers were giving way.
The fact that the videos showed these upper stories breaking apart during the tower "collapses" also shows that either the lower floors were putting up incredible resistance or that both the upper and lower sections were being blown apart as the whole thing went down. Since it is impossible* that the lower sections can both offer high resistance and fall at the same time, this also proves demolition.
One might also argue that the upper floors merely had to start to fall to initiate a chain-reaction collapsing event, and then once that occurred, it didn't matter what happened to the upper floors. The problem with this argument is that it assumes that the floors of the towers were like a line of dominoes just waiting to be knocked over and that nothing needed to drive the total collapse except a couple of upper floors.
*In the case of a vehicle collision, it would be like a small car smashing into the rear of a dump truck and then getting flattened at the same time it flattens the dump truck from the rear to the front. It is hard to imagine, isn't it? Even if you assume another small car was smashing into the small car from behind at the same time (i.e. to mimic gravity), this is hard to imagine.
By the same token, if the top 30 stories of WTC2 were strong enough to drive through the lower 80 stories of the tower and induce its total collapse, we should see these top 30 stories sitting intact atop the rubble of WTC2.
This is not unlike the proof for no plane hitting the WTC: if the plane was strong enough to punch out a silhouette shape of itself in the side of the WTC, it can't be completely destroyed by the same structure.
An object simply CAN'T completely destroy something and be completely destroyed itself.
And an explosive device is a completely different situation than a solid object colliding with another solid object.
UPDATE: One might argue that the upper floors of the WTC did drive the collapse of the tower staying intact and then only broke apart once it reached the ground. However, this notion is belied by the fact that all videos of the WTC "collapses" show the upper stories collapsing in on themselves (and off the side) at the same time the lower portions of the towers were giving way.
The fact that the videos showed these upper stories breaking apart during the tower "collapses" also shows that either the lower floors were putting up incredible resistance or that both the upper and lower sections were being blown apart as the whole thing went down. Since it is impossible* that the lower sections can both offer high resistance and fall at the same time, this also proves demolition.
One might also argue that the upper floors merely had to start to fall to initiate a chain-reaction collapsing event, and then once that occurred, it didn't matter what happened to the upper floors. The problem with this argument is that it assumes that the floors of the towers were like a line of dominoes just waiting to be knocked over and that nothing needed to drive the total collapse except a couple of upper floors.
*In the case of a vehicle collision, it would be like a small car smashing into the rear of a dump truck and then getting flattened at the same time it flattens the dump truck from the rear to the front. It is hard to imagine, isn't it? Even if you assume another small car was smashing into the small car from behind at the same time (i.e. to mimic gravity), this is hard to imagine.
posted by spooked at 11:46 AM
11 Comments:
"the technology for directed energy weapons goes back some decades - what is happening is we are now starting to see the application of these being brought to fruition...."
ret. col. alexander - los alamos.
Well said, Spooked. That ties together both issues nicely and simply.
The brain of Spook again.
I bet each and every one of you have sent money to some lady named Abacha in Nigeria who said they had a client with the last name as you who died on some airplane and they wanted YOU, yes YOU gto split a million bucks.
The point being you have absolutely no concept of reality and you are as gullible as a new born baby (assuming you don't abort it).
Keep it up though, you bunch of moronic lunatic idiots! You continue to entertain the masses! Can't wait till you are a "captive" entertainer in one of those domestic detainee faciulities Halliburton is building for us!
Mwahahahahahahaha!
hmmm. in fact a lady in nigeria did tell me that. so i merely did a search of the social security death index only to discover that no-one with my name has died. surprisingly enough that is the same results that one gets when doing a search of the very same death index for the names of the alleged 9/11 airline victims: very few of them have actually died.
what a surprise.
The official 9/11 story is in fact that the upper sections of those buildings came loose from plane and fire damage and driven by gravity completely crushed the lower towers. Do you think that is what happened Pinch?
Except that what was seen at Ground Zero was only a very small pile of rubble. Where did those massively strong upper sections of the towers go? They had to be strong to bring down the whole towers.
Can two physical objects collide and completely destroy each other? Perhaps Pinch could provide an example for us. And we are not talking about particle physics here. We are talking about Newtonian mechanics in the macro physical world.
off topic, but if anyone hasn't checked out the latest audio from total, give it a listen! there is some interesting information regarding WTC concrete, but i found the discussion titled 'revelation of the method' even more interesting and thought provoking.
http://www.total411.info/2007/01/revelation-of-wtc-method-explosive.html
great stuff, total!
are the Steven Jones@Berkeley vids back yet???
hopefully some SPOOK didn't have them removed...if anyone knows where i can watch those Jones/Berkeley vids (where he gets *grilled* by audience members), please repost that link for ALL TO SEE...
PS: I hope Pinch, Sword, ConSmash, and the ScrewLooseChange crew end up at a FEMA/Halliburton camp...don't drop the soap, guys!!
by the way, i think you're all a bunch of PAID SPOOKS...whatever pain is headed your way, you deserve it, 2007 is the year the
S-11 Psy-Op will be EXPOSED for ALL TO SEE!!! and there's NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!!!
"Can two physical objects collide and completely destroy each other?"
Are you serious with this question? Before I answer, please tell me you are joking.
Ever seen a mid-air collision of aircraft where both aircraft are totally destroyed? Ever seen a head-on collision of automobiles where both vehicles are totaly destroyed?
You really are a moron.
you're also dealing with some different types of collisions there, instabitch. you've given us a plane vs. plane example and a car vs. car example, but in reality, we're discussing a plane vs. building example (which may or may not be approximated by a car vs. wall analogy).
don't soil your flightsuit, but while we're all very impressed with your flyboy skills, what we've actually talking about here is quite different than the mid air collision you've witnessed, as plane vs. plane.
no soup for you!
One point is that the top 15 stories of WTC1 taking down the rest of the tower is not unlike a mini-cooper smashing into a tractor trailer truck. No matter how fast the mini-cooper car is going, it is not going to smash the tractor trailer truck apart into teeny-tiny pieces.
Another point is that even in the two examples Pinch gives, I highly doubt the two vehicles in question were completely broken into miniscule pieces. One car might be smashed to tiny pieces, but no way both are.
Once again Pinch fails to see the details.
No soup indeed.
Pinch is a bitchazznigga...bacdafucup, pinch!!
--Onyx
Post a Comment
<< Home