+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: 911 (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: 9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I (/thread-9891.html)
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Charles Drago - 20-10-2012
Less than satisfying.
I neither stated nor implied that evenly spaced "booms" were impossible.
IF all your IFs are granted, then the possibility of even spacing is enhanced.
But does not the principle of parsimony suggest otherwise?
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Jeffrey Orling - 20-10-2012
Charles,
I don't have x ray vision and don't KNOW what was going on. I offer possible scenarios based on the structure and how it might come apart supported by the visual record. I don't claim my suggested mechanism is the only one... But assigning everything to a string of timed explosives which closely resemble the gravitational speed of collapse is a bit of a stretch. Who thinks of such plans?
Jack.. set the sequence timer to make it sound like a collapse... no one will know the difference.
Talk about parsimony eh...
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Albert Doyle - 20-10-2012
There were emergency personnel a lot closer to WTC 7 who were in a position to hear any spaced demolition charges as seen in the conventional demolition videos. Those department store charges have a pretty distinct sharp crack to the explosion that would have been heard by those closer in.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Charles Drago - 20-10-2012
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Charles,
I don't have x ray vision and don't KNOW what was going on. I offer possible scenarios based on the structure and how it might come apart supported by the visual record. I don't claim my suggested mechanism is the only one... But assigning everything to a string of timed explosives which closely resemble the gravitational speed of collapse is a bit of a stretch. Who thinks of such plans?
Jack.. set the sequence timer to make it sound like a collapse... no one will know the difference.
Talk about parsimony eh...
The timing of the explosions should be compared to established patterns within controlled demolitions.
Your "Jack" drama is just that: pure fiction of the Straw Man variety. You could easily assign collapse values to match the timing of the "booms" -- which is what you did.
And while the floors may have been equally spaced, they were not equally loaded.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Charles Drago - 20-10-2012
Albert Doyle Wrote:There were emergency personnel a lot closer
Than whom?
Albert Doyle Wrote:to WTC 7
Than what?
[quote=Albert Doyle]who were in a position to hear any spaced demolition charges as seen
Do you mean "heard"?
Albert Doyle Wrote:in the conventional demolition videos. Those department store charges
WHAT?
Albert Doyle Wrote:have a pretty distinct sharp crack to the explosion that would have been heard by those closer in.
CRACK???
Albert, it's difficult enough to follow your "logic" without having it expressed in Pidgin English.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Albert Doyle - 20-10-2012
I think the post was clear enough. If you watch the department store video in this thread the demolition charges go off with a distinct crack that isn't seen in the oscilloscope booms. If WTC 7 was a controlled demolition why didn't its charges 'crack' like those in the department store video? That isn't so difficult to understand.
Closer than Ashley Banfield.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Jeffrey Orling - 20-10-2012
Charles Drago Wrote:[quote=Jeffrey Orling]Charles,
And while the floors may have been equally spaced, they were not equally loaded.
Wrong... the difference in the floor loads was insignificant compared to the structure that supported the live loads. You are talking about something you don't know much about.... obviously.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Jeffrey Orling - 20-10-2012
I don't think anyone has shown that the audio spectrum signature of the video matches those from a CD. If so let's see the analysis.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Albert Doyle - 20-10-2012
If you look at the Ashleigh Banfield video there's a distinct dust cloud rising BEFORE the "booms". What is causing that abnormal dust cloud behind her? I'll tell you what it is. It's the falling of WTC-7. Which means that video is dishonest and is lying about the timing of what they are showing. This makes it much much more likely, to the point of certainty, that the booms you are being shown are the building collapsing.
Also, go back and watch their oscilloscope presentation. The booms are not evenly spaced. They group together towards the end as they would with the accelerating progress of a collapse. But the dishonest video regroups them into identically even spacing when they do their analysis.
.
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - Albert Doyle - 20-10-2012
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Charles Drago Wrote:[quote=Jeffrey Orling]Charles,
And while the floors may have been equally spaced, they were not equally loaded.
Wrong... the difference in the floor loads was insignificant compared to the structure that supported the live loads. You are talking about something you don't know much about.... obviously.
Correct Jeffrey. Charles is ignorant of the basic principle of Galileo's law.