911 and the Demo Truth
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Intermediate Accounting 12th and 13th edition Kieso Weygandt
Next: JSH: Back to conic section parameterization result
From: Al Dykes on 6 Oct 2009 15:02 In article <hag3o7$9hr$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu>, Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >Al Dykes wrote: >> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>> AllYou! wrote: >>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >>>>> AllYou! wrote: >>>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: > >>>>>>> Tell us why you "think" your imaginary compressed air remained >>>>>>> focused like a cannon shot when it entered the vast open office >>>>>>> spaces. > >>>>>> It didn't have to do that > >>>>> But it did. > >>>> It never does. Pressure is equal across the entire pressure >>>> boundary, > >>> You're contradicting yourself. According to you, when the >>> equal pressure encountered rows of windows of equal size and >>> strength, it blew out the side of the building in a tightly >>> focused explosion of pulverized concrete. Why didn't it blow >>> out entire rows of windows without the pulverized concrete >>> since the windows all had the same force applied to them? > >> If what you think you see was caused by man-made explosives, all the >> glass would be gone from every window. > > That would depend on the size of the explosion, nut job. The >towers were two hundred feet across. The 1993 bombing, 1000 pounds of explosive, was heard all up and down the WTC towers and all over the 16 acre plaza. It wasn't large enough to do any structural damage. Nothing like that was heard on 9/11. There was no man-made demolition at WTC on 9/11. -- Al Dykes News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
From: Al Dykes on 6 Oct 2009 15:08 In article <hag3o7$9hr$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu>, Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >Al Dykes wrote: >> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>> AllYou! wrote: >>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >>>>> AllYou! wrote: >>>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: > >>>>>>> Tell us why you "think" your imaginary compressed air remained >>>>>>> focused like a cannon shot when it entered the vast open office >>>>>>> spaces. > >>>>>> It didn't have to do that > >>>>> But it did. > >>>> It never does. Pressure is equal across the entire pressure >>>> boundary, > >>> You're contradicting yourself. According to you, when the >>> equal pressure encountered rows of windows of equal size and >>> strength, it blew out the side of the building in a tightly >>> focused explosion of pulverized concrete. Why didn't it blow >>> out entire rows of windows without the pulverized concrete >>> since the windows all had the same force applied to them? > >> If what you think you see was caused by man-made explosives, all the >> glass would be gone from every window. > > That would depend on the size of the explosion, nut job. The >towers were two hundred feet across. > Why do you "think" all these people would lie about what >they saw, heard, and felt, nut job? > > > http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html > > > Explosions > >Reports of Sights and Sounds of Explosions in the Oral Histories >The oral histories released on August 12, 2005 contain many >recollections of the sights and sounds of explosions. The excerpts on >this page describe perceptions of the South Tower collapse, except where >noted otherwise. > > >Rich Banaciski -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22] >We were there I don't know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just >remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they >blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around >like a belt, all these explosions. >Interview, 12/06/01, New York Times > Full text here. What he saw was *after* the collapse starts. That's not how man-made demolition works. Nothing reported by only one person is loud enough to be man made demolition. This one is like all the firemen's reports. "Like" is a simile. http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Banaciski_Richard.txt ... I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television when they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions. Everybody just said run and we all turned around and we ran into the parking garage because that's basically where we were. Running forward would be running towards it. Not thinking that this building is coming down. We just thought there was going to be a big explosion, stuff was going to come down. All the other names will have a similar fate. -- Al Dykes News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
From: Henry on 6 Oct 2009 15:09 Al Dykes wrote: > There was no man-made demolition at WTC on 9/11. So, all the videos showing exactly that are faked, eh? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c&feature=channel_page -- http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org
From: Al Dykes on 6 Oct 2009 15:12 In article <hag4m7$aig$2(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu>, Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >Al Dykes wrote: > >> There was no man-made demolition at WTC on 9/11. > > So, all the videos showing exactly that are faked, eh? > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c&feature=channel_page There is no video of an explosion immediately preceding collapse of a WTC tower with a correctly tmes the BOOM on the sound track. It would be just a few seconds long. If there were, it would be on the main page of every "Truth" website. -- Al Dykes News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
From: Henry on 6 Oct 2009 15:13
Al Dykes wrote: > Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html >> Explosions >> Reports of Sights and Sounds of Explosions in the Oral Histories >> The oral histories released on August 12, 2005 contain many >> recollections of the sights and sounds of explosions. The excerpts on >> this page describe perceptions of the South Tower collapse, except where >> noted otherwise. > "Like" is a simile. "Dykes" is likely insane. >> Do you actually believe that if supports on only one side of >> a tall building are destroyed, the building will drop straight >> down onto its own footprint? > Yes. Who do you "think" faked all the photos and videos showing tall buildings topping sideways, and why do you "think" they did it? http://www.metacafe.com/watch/176540/china_demolition/ I wonder if the other magic fire cartoon conspiracy kooks are embarrassed by the level of your insanity yet? <chuckle> -- http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org |