• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Grand Jury will look at evidence of explosives used to take down WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 on 9/11

The NIST report claim no structural damage contributed to the collapse. It claims office fires alone are what caused the structural failure and collapse.

I haven't read the whole NIST report. IF that is what the report says then in my opinion it is wrong.

I know from my own experience with explosives that seismic events can do damage to buildings. I do not recall doing any damage to any buildings myself but I know that it does happen. The company had our own seismograph to measure what we did and we used another company to monitor our work as well.
 
I haven't read the whole NIST report. IF that is what the report says then in my opinion it is wrong.

I know from my own experience with explosives that seismic events can do damage to buildings. I do not recall doing any damage to any buildings myself but I know that it does happen. The company had our own seismograph to measure what we did and we used another company to monitor our work as well.

Given the size of the two towers and that they collapsed from the top on down, in your experience, what kind of measurement do you think you would realistically get for seismic activity if you were standing across the street? What's that, 40 yards?

Manhattan is built on solid bedrock, does that make the transfer of such energy better, or worse?
 
Appreciate you taking the time to provide an informed opinion. The horror of the scene that day plus armchair demo expert theories (myself included) do not necessarily equal reality.

6bz

When the conspiracy theory guys say stuff like those buildings fell at free fall speed I tend to point out that that is not correct.

Find a video for building 7 which allows you to see what some term the penthouse structure and you will see that structure collapse then there is a pause of a couple of seconds and then the rest of the collapse. Nothing on earth falling at free fall speed exhibits such a pause.

I did a bit of research on this because I didn't believe it either. What I found convinced me that what I saw wasn't done with explosives.
 
A bunch of terrorists took us by surprise by exploiting somewhat lax screening processes and took over a few planes and slammed them into buildings. The end.
A bunch of terrorist from Saudi Arabia, but we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq instead, and do massive arms deals with Saudi because they play ball with our Petro dollar. And now there's a Saudi Statue at ground zero that says there's no other god but Allah.

But yep, it was just a few fringe Islamic lunatics that set all these events in motion :rolleyes:
 
Given the size of the two towers and that they collapsed from the top on down, in your experience, what kind of measurement do you think you would realistically get for seismic activity if you were standing across the street? What's that, 40 yards?

Manhattan is built on solid bedrock, does that make the transfer of such energy better, or worse?

I'd say something like a 4 or 5 but I don't have experience doing that math..

According to what I am finding the aircraft impacts alone registered 0.9 and 0.7. Apparently the tower collapses registered as a 2.1 and a 2.3.

Since the buildings in New York are designed to handle a 4 or 4.5, "The seismologists said the weakening of adjacent structures was more likely caused by the sudden air pressure of the volcano-like debris flow, not ground shaking." When I saw that 2.3 and 2.1 I was thinking that that wasn't the issue but didn't think about the over pressure.

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2016/09/06/a-morning-that-shook-the-world/
 
Conspiracy theorists be like the Illuminati has everything to do with it. Just :fish2: for memes.
7c0.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom