vincent_vega_lives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 10:54 AM
Original message |
|
Explain how debris can be below the collapse point if the collapse was at 'free fall' speeds? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=117759&mesg_id=117866The debris is moving at free fall speeds, the building is not.
|
FoxOnTheRun
(829 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 11:31 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Isn't it ejected up and is falling down later? |
vincent_vega_lives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
Nothing is ejected up. Horizontaly yes. Regardless that would even take longer...
|
FoxOnTheRun
(829 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. What about air resistence? |
|
Dust storms in Baghdad for example..
|
vincent_vega_lives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Not sure what your point is (n/t) |
whistle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 02:07 PM
Response to Original message |
3. These photos along with slow-motion videos clearly show the |
|
...debris being ejected as if by a sequence of explosives, not reactions to kinetic energy impacts of falling materials from above. All three buildings (WTC 1, 2 and 7) were demolished by controlled demolitions and planted explosives.
|
TheWraith
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
1. Your post didn't answer the OP.
2. You're stating as facts things which are not fact.
3. You're making assumptions not in evidence, i.e. that the only possible reason for debris ejection is explosives, an assumption which is untrue.
4. You're willfully ignorant.
|
libertypirate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. Oh yes unreason.... Because.... |
|
..Some people don't need to understand how buildings just fall apart to assume they can do that.
Talk about willful ignorance...
So how does the ignorant explain why each towers oscillations were identical to normal no damage after each respective impact? Or are you going to just call me silly stupid like you did to the guy above? Or are you not going to understand my question? Or are you just going to ignore me?
|
LARED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. The oscillations were identical to normal |
|
after the impacts?
Tell me, how much change would you expect to see in the natural frequency of the WTC'er after the impact? How in the world can you know how much it changed?
|
TheWraith
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-16-06 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. What you just said makes no sense. |
|
"Some people don't need to understand how buildings just fall apart to assume they can do that."
It's been explained time, and time, and time again, by me, by structural engineers, and others. It's really quite simple.
"So how does the ignorant explain why each towers oscillations were identical to normal no damage after each respective impact? Or are you going to just call me silly stupid like you did to the guy above? Or are you not going to understand my question? Or are you just going to ignore me?"
What the hell are you talking about? The oscillations? I'd dearly love to know what you think you know about the "oscillations" and what you think that supposed knowledge proves.
|
vincent_vega_lives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. What makes you think it takes |
|
Chemical energy and not kinetic engergy to produce the seen results? How much energy do you think it would take to produce those results?
Explosives on each and every floor?
|
tenseconds
(237 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-15-06 09:27 PM
Response to Original message |
|
The falling debris is falling faster than the collapse point because its initial velocity is a due result of its source...explosives.
|
vincent_vega_lives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-19-06 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. The debris was ejected |
|
horizontally from the point of collapse, so how was the debris accelerated downward again?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon Apr 29th 2024, 07:30 PM
Response to Original message |