Why don't people want to know the truth about 9/11?

[Mr.Fitnah]

what about the core ? and the floors where turned to dust how could they maintain and even gain weigh t? and how could this resistance not slow the collapse ?

It did. What would have been "free fall speed" in seconds and MPH?

 

[eots]

what about the core ? and the floors where turned to dust how could they maintain and even gain weigh t? and how could this resistance not slow the collapse ?

It did. What would have been "free fall speed" in seconds and MPH?

free fall is free fall ,

 

[eots]

Free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only or dominant force acting upon it, at least initially. These conditions produce an inertial trajectory so long as gravity remains the only force. Since this definition does not specify velocity

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

what about the core ? and the floors where turned to dust how could they maintain and even gain weigh t? and how could this resistance not slow the collapse ?

It did. What would have been "free fall speed" in seconds and MPH?

free fall is free fall ,

If you are going to make unsubstantiated vague claims and use them as proof of deviation from predicted events you are not going to be able to prove anything.
How can we know there was no slowing if we dont know the no resistance speed in seconds and MPH which you will not state.
Commit to something.

 

[DiveCon]

Free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only or dominant force acting upon it, at least initially. These conditions produce an inertial trajectory so long as gravity remains the only force. Since this definition does not specify velocity

thats not answering his question

 

[eots]

Free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only or dominant force acting upon it, at least initially. These conditions produce an inertial trajectory so long as gravity remains the only force. Since this definition does not specify velocity

thats not answering his question

it is not a real question you moron...

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only or dominant force acting upon it, at least initially. These conditions produce an inertial trajectory so long as gravity remains the only force. Since this definition does not specify velocity

thats not answering his question

it is not a real question you moron...

Yeah it is, If you are going to claim something fell at near free fall speed we need to know what that speed is specifically so the veracity of the claim can be judged based on evidence.

 

[eots]

thats not answering his question

it is not a real question you moron...

Yeah it is, If you are going to claim something fell at near free fall speed we need to know what that speed is specifically so the veracity of the claim can be judged based on evidence.

and what difference does it make is it is measured in ft per sec or mph ?

 

[DiveCon]

it is not a real question you moron...

Yeah it is, If you are going to claim something fell at near free fall speed we need to know what that speed is specifically so the veracity of the claim can be judged based on evidence.

and what difference does it make is it is measured in ft per sec or mph ?

give it in either

 

[eots]

"at near free fall speed" and "essentially at free fall" are the terms and official conclusions of NIST

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

"at near free fall speed" and "essentially at free fall" are the terms and official conclusions of NIST

Does that mean you are going to stop saying there was no resistance?

 

[eots]

yeah it is, if you are going to claim something fell at near free fall speed we need to know what that speed is specifically so the veracity of the claim can be judged based on evidence.

and what difference does it make is it is measured in ft per sec or mph ?

give it in either

how about you give it in either ..as it is not in dispute...simlpy google nist report and it will give it to you in feet per sec and you can make a point if you even have one

 

[eots]

"at near free fall speed" and "essentially at free fall" are the terms and official conclusions of NIST

Does that mean you are going to stop saying there was no resistance?

Sure if it makes your day I will say essentially no resistances

 

[Obamerican]

as usual Gomer, I see your hear to kiss the ass of the resident troll.

Let me show you how your sentence should've been written, you little piece of uneducated shit:

As usual, Gomer, I see you're here to kiss the ass of the resident troll.

Fucking loser.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only or dominant force acting upon it, at least initially. These conditions produce an inertial trajectory so long as gravity remains the only force. Since this definition does not specify velocity

thats not answering his question

Did you really expect him to answer it???

 

[idb]

as usual Gomer, I see your hear to kiss the ass of the resident troll.

Let me show you how your sentence should've been written, you little piece of uneducated shit:

As usual, Gomer, I see you're here to kiss the ass of the resident troll.

Fucking loser.

As usual, Gomer, I see you're here to kiss the arse of the resident troll.

As we say in the Commonwealth

 

[KissMy]

holy shit
that guy is an idiot
he used SOLID blocks
that changes the dynamic

Exactly - Solid blocks don't lend themselves to compaction even though they have been broken. Their debris of solid objects create resistance unlike a hollow structure that just forces the air from between the floors.

Anyhow the video does not mention the force generated. Doing a calculation on a 10-lb sledge hammer dropping 1 story or 10-ft creates a force of 10,000-lbs. That is 1,000 times the force the it took just to hold the hammer static in the air. The same goes for the building. The tower was built to hold less than 20 times its static downward force load at a given height. Now dropping a portion of the building 10-ft increased the downward force by 1,000 times. On top of that for every crushed floor the moving mass gained weight & mass. This kept on increasing the force as the building fell.

what about the core ? and the floors where turned to dust how could they maintain and even gain weigh t? and how could this resistance not slow the collapse ?

The falling mass gain the weight of every floor it tore loose as it fell minus some concrete & drywall dust that was blown out by the air forced out from between every floor. The collapse had resistance & did not fall at free-fall speed. You will notice that debris are falling at twice the rate of the collapse. The core can be seen standing longer but ultimately bent & collapsed by the shear stress. Those bent coulombs are shown in photos.

 

[Gamolon]

You will notice that debris are falling at twice the rate of the collapse.

This is a great point.

How does the debris fall faster than the so called "freefall collapse" of the towers proper? Did the pieces of debris have jet-packs strapped to them propelling them downwards?

 

[eots]

Exactly - Solid blocks don't lend themselves to compaction even though they have been broken. Their debris of solid objects create resistance unlike a hollow structure that just forces the air from between the floors.

Anyhow the video does not mention the force generated. Doing a calculation on a 10-lb sledge hammer dropping 1 story or 10-ft creates a force of 10,000-lbs. That is 1,000 times the force the it took just to hold the hammer static in the air. The same goes for the building. The tower was built to hold less than 20 times its static downward force load at a given height. Now dropping a portion of the building 10-ft increased the downward force by 1,000 times. On top of that for every crushed floor the moving mass gained weight & mass. This kept on increasing the force as the building fell.

what about the core ? and the floors where turned to dust how could they maintain and even gain weigh t? and how could this resistance not slow the collapse ?

The falling mass gain the weight of every floor it tore loose as it fell minus some concrete & drywall dust that was blown out by the air forced out from between every floor. The collapse had resistance & did not fall at free-fall speed. You will notice that debris are falling at twice the rate of the collapse. The core can be seen standing longer but ultimately bent & collapsed by the shear stress. Those bent coulombs are shown in photos.

twice the rate....shut up....why do you debwunkers keep contradicting the NIST report

 

[Sallow]

Here's the truth.

Some pissed off assholes from other countries rammed planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon killing people that were just doing their jobs.

That's it.

Done.