The 9/11 Forum

See http://911blogger.com/node/20938

Basically, a completely 'unnatural' downward acceleration following an outward acceleration. The white-ish smoke allow you to follow the movement.

Perhaps the most fascinating thing about this 'rocket' is that it supports the idea of a "slow explosive". I.e., presumably gas production creates momentum effects, but not so dramatic that you get the cracking sound associated with high explosives.

I find it odd that nobody had noticed this, before. Would some other people double-check this, with whatever videos they already have?

I'm just a dumb youtuber....

I'm a bit bored debunking this stuff.

West side ejections: Good.

Object leading fall from south side: I know exactly what it is, anyone else want to try?


Object that "changed momentum" in mid-air: Not upper block portion of east face. Try lower block portion of east face. Talked about many times by me before. I can name the exact floors from which the top of the sheet came.

Peeling outwards.



Why do people associate 9-11 truthers with "flip-flopping"?


These dudes scar the efforts we make with this stuff.


He should have brought the observations to this forum for feedback before releasing it as a "smoking gun".



Friends, can you see how piss poor the system of intellectual fact-checking and feedback is among thes folks?

Can you see how they serve to embarass better efforts?


Please watch how these great "discoveries" are treated within the more vocal 9-11 truth community. They will praise it to the heavens. Then some a-hole on JREF will "debunk it" with equally poor analysis.

Tweedle-dee vs Tweedle-dum



Do these people not prove what I have been writing on other threads?


Metamars, I mean no disrespect to you in pointing this out.

Major_Tom,

I don't read most of the threads having to do with collapse dynamics, or video analysis or simulation of collapses. So, sorry if you've covered this, already, and I've missed it.

However, I don't think you're really dealing with what I had focussed on - i.e., the "rocket". If you look at about 1:24 into the video, there's a piece of ejecta, well behind the collapse front, that takes a direction close to a right angle turn.

Have you discussed this, previously? If so (and you can stand the boredom ), please post links to it.

However, I don't think you're really dealing with what I had focussed on - i.e., the "rocket". If you look at about 1:24 into the video, there's a piece of ejecta, well behind the collapse front, that takes a direction close to a right angle turn.

Have you discussed this, previously? If so (and you can stand the boredom ), please post links to it.

I've noticed the "rocket" for a while now. I didn't bother commenting on my observations because why would I waste my time if so few people would actually read it?

Funny comment about enduring the boredom. I'm sorry for the sarcasm.


How about this experiment: I'll let the other posters write their comments before I state my opinion. I want to see where people are at on this.



(Metamars, Tony Szamboti and others from stj911, my beef was never with anyone but a small group of people at that forum. I appreciate how you allowed me to freely comment about many things on that forum. You allowed me freedom without attacking me for my comments.

I am sorry for the sarcasm. But I can see right through this thing and it is for the birds.

It isn't hard to see an extremely large object moving through the dust and following a trajectory.

You don't have to be an expert at anything to group photos of regions and see how the perimeter columns fell.

Then you connect the dots.



I honestly do not understand the excuse people have for not being able to see what is happening along the east face of WTC2.

Any one of us can map the movement of this massive object given the right collection of video and photos.

Yet after 8 years it is treated as a "mystery" when it is right in front of our freaking faces.

Any one of us can map it to the individual bolt connection with not much effort given the right collection of photos and video.



It is knowable and you don't have to be an expert to do it.

I think femr will be able to verify that the dynamics are knowable to within the splitting of individual bolt connections (and will hopefully show that I am not a crack-pot nutcase inventing all this. At least I hope so......)

Metamars:

What I don't like about Chandler's latest video is his equation:

White smoke = Thermite

I think Chandler should stick to physics and leave chemistry to the chemists.

Chandler's video makes me wonder what happened to the 3000 degree molten metal normally associated with burning thermite. After all, Jones et al. have assured us (many times!) that the yellowish-orange glowing material falling out of WTC 2 was produced by burning thermite. So now we have cool thermite?????

But, as any chemist would tell you, lots of things make "white smoke".

If you ask me the white smoke is more consistent with ammonium perchlorate decomposition, (from the HCl "mist"), and supports my spiked thermal insulation theory quite well.

So Metamars, prove to me that Chandler's "rocket" isn't ammonium perchlorate, .... after all, AP is rocket fuel!

In my opinion the outer core columns were cut a regular intervals by some high-tec energetic devices (thermite + ceramic cladding) attached to them to produce the top-down controlled demolition as seen on the videos. If any of these devices were not properly attached to the column, it could just fly away horisontally like a rocket and produce the smoke trails spotted by David. When the thermite had burnt, the hot ceramic cladding would stop due to air resistance ... and drop down vertically.

Heiwa:

Air resistance applies to any object ejected from WTC 2, not just your alleged "thermite smoke bombs". But please explain how your ceramic cladding produces white smoke?

And as a follow-up to my previous post I have since consulted the book "Propellants and Explosives" by N. Kubota which has a whole section (12.3.2) on "White Smoke Emitters".

It talks about phosphorus pentoxide, zinc chloride, and yes, my favorite: ammonium perchlorate.
But sorry to say, no mention of thermite!

Dr. G wrote:Heiwa:

Air resistance applies to any object ejected from WTC 2, not just your alleged "thermite smoke bombs". But please explain how your ceramic cladding produces white smoke?

And as a follow-up to my previous post I have since consulted the book "Propellants and Explosives" by N. Kubota which has a whole section (12.3.2) on "White Smoke Emitters".

It talks about phosphorus pentoxide, zinc chloride, and yes, my favorite: ammonium perchlorate.
But sorry to say, no mention of thermite!

Dr. G,

I am sure you have probably explained your theory of how the thermal insulation could have been spiked with ammonium perchlorate before, but could you give a brief synopsis of it to refresh our memories or at least a link to where you have explained your theory on this.

Tony,

For a summary of the AP theory go to the "Other Issues" thread and see my post for Nov 18, 2008

Dr. G wrote:Heiwa:

Air resistance applies to any object ejected from WTC 2, not just your alleged "thermite smoke bombs". But please explain how your ceramic cladding produces white smoke?

Thermite smoke bombs? To cut steel columns? No, a simple energetic cutting device with ceramic cladding to project the heat produced by the device towards the object to be cut, e.g. a steel column. Note that the incombustible cladding can have different shapes to project the heat towards the object to be cut. It does not produce any smoke at all! It is incombustible. The heat is produced by the thermite. If the device is badly attached (or not at all) the heat will just expand in air (not cut the column) and the cladding will fly away like a rocket. You really have to handle these cutting devices with care.

Heiwa wrote:Thermite smoke bombs? To cut steel columns? No, a simple energetic cutting device with ceramic cladding to project the heat produced by the device towards the object to be cut, e.g. a steel column. Note that the incombustible cladding can have different shapes to project the heat towards the object to be cut. It does not produce any smoke at all! It is incombustible. The heat is produced by the thermite. If the device is badly attached (or not at all) the heat will just expand in air (not cut the column) and the cladding will fly away like a rocket. You really have to handle these cutting devices with care.

I tend to believe devices of this type were used on the joints between the outer core columns and beams and the spandrel splices at the corners of the perimeter. Dr. Astaneh said he saw melting on core girders where the joints were located. Destroying the joints would have had the same effect as cutting the columns and be much less noticeable in the rubble.

Link: http://911blogger.com/node/20948

My comment at 911blogger:

Well, in close-up, slow-motion, it's less anomalous
If you look at about :55 into the video, you can see that something is headed downwards, seemingly in a collision course with the 'right-angle' ejecta. If there's a collision, and it's much less massive than what hit it, neither the direction nor acceleration should surprise anybody.

So, can we determine whether there was, indeed a collision? No, not from this video. Furthermore, we don't know the relative momentums were of debris that may have collided.

White smoke-trails from ammonium perchlorate, ............ not thermite

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mirrors/ima ... 062382.jpg

Dr. G wrote:White smoke-trails from ammonium perchlorate, ............ not thermite

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mirrors/ima ... 062382.jpg

So if the ammonium perchlorate notion is true it would mean that those who believe large columns and beams were artificially propelled up to 600 feet can now point to their actually being rocket fuel propelled. Who would have thought?

However, I don't know if you are aware that a major reason for research into nano-energetics was for more efficient rocket propulsion and nano-sized aluminum is prominent in these nano-energetic formulations.

http://www.mrs.org/s_mrs/sec_subscribe. ... ion=detail