Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 6 votes

WTC 911 EyeWitness~Hoboken


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
3683 replies to this topic

#1516    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,202 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 19 April 2013 - 06:28 PM

View PostStundie, on 19 April 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Jesus......lol....Here we go again!! :blink:
  • It can't be compressed air, for the simple reason that we would see the air and debris continuously being pushed out at each point as the collapse progresses as the air is being continuously compressed. What we see being expelled out of the sides of the building is a puff, in other words a short sharp ejection pushing out the air and then suddenly stopping even though the collapse continues supposedly building more pressure.
  • It can't be compressed air because at the point where it escaped, there would be an even bigger continuous puff being ejected out around the same areas as the pressure built up. Unless these areas were big enough to continuously decrease the pressure as the collapse continued, which would mean there would be no further placed needed for any more ejections, which evidently is not true because more of them continue to appear further down the building.
  • It can't be compressed air because we see these puffs come out some 40 plus floors below the collapse zone which then disappears, for another one to appear many floors above it and still below the collapse zone for that to disappear too as the collapse continues. Unless panto debunkers want to claim that after being expelled out of the side of the building, this compressed air did a complete U-turn and instead of escaping through it's original route, it travelled through the entire building only to escape elsewhere. Magic air! lol
  • It can't be compressed air because there are plenty of places for any trapped air to escape at the point of collapse, unless panto debunkers think the collapse points around the collapse zone was air tight! :blink:

Since over 90% of the interior of the WTC buildings comprised of air, where did you think all of that air was going as the buildings collapsed? It is all very simple to understand when you look at these photos and video and understand that no explosives were used and yet you see squibs ejected as the buildings collapse.

Posted Image



Posted Image


Posted Image




Edited by skyeagle409, 19 April 2013 - 06:32 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1517    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:59 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 April 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

Since over 90% of the interior of the WTC buildings comprised of air, where did you think all of that air was going as the buildings collapsed?
There is plenty of escape routes like out the sides and tops of the building collapse zone, as it was not air tight for it cause compressed air. lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 April 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

It is all very simple to understand when you look at these photos and video and understand that no explosives were used and yet you see squibs ejected as the buildings collapse.

Posted Image





Posted Image


Posted Image

And if we needed any evidence that ignorance is bliss, this be the post. lol

For a start you didn't address any of the points I raised which disprove your theory that it was air.

Secondly, I do not see any squibs in the Verinage demolition appearing below the collapse zone like the 3 examples highlighted below at the WTC.
Posted Image

So unless you want to address the reasons why it can't be compressed air.
  • It can't be compressed air, for the simple reason that we would see the air and debris continuously being pushed out at each point as the collapse progresses as the air is being continuously compressed. What we see being expelled out of the sides of the building is a puff, in other words a short sharp ejection pushing out the air and then suddenly stopping even though the collapse continues supposedly building more pressure.
  • It can't be compressed air because at the point where it escaped, there would be an even bigger continuous puff being ejected out around the same areas as the pressure built up. Unless these areas were big enough to continuously decrease the pressure as the collapse continued, which would mean there would be no further placed needed for any more ejections, which evidently is not true because more of them continue to appear further down the building.
  • It can't be compressed air because we see these puffs come out some 40 plus floors below the collapse zone which then disappears, for another one to appear many floors above it and still below the collapse zone for that to disappear too as the collapse continues. Unless panto debunkers want to claim that after being expelled out of the side of the building, this compressed air did a complete U-turn and instead of escaping through it's original route, it travelled through the entire building only to escape elsewhere. Magic air! lol
  • It can't be compressed air because there are plenty of places for any trapped air to escape at the point of collapse, unless panto debunkers think the collapse points around the collapse zone was air tight
Why is there no compressed air in the verinage collapse happening below the collapse zone?? Is it because that any air compressed in the verinage demolition can escape at the collapse zone? And that the only air compressed is you talking out your butt....lol

Edited by Stundie, 24 April 2013 - 10:02 AM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1518    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,821 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006

Posted 24 April 2013 - 10:35 AM

View PostStundie, on 24 April 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

Why is there no compressed air in the verinage collapse happening below the collapse zone?? Is it because that any air compressed in the verinage demolition can escape at the collapse zone?

You've answered your own question.  In the verinage demolitions, as in any CD, the glazing is removed first for safety.  Hence the air can escape though the window openings at each floor as the collapse progresses.

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#1519    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 24 April 2013 - 11:37 AM

View Postflyingswan, on 24 April 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

You've answered your own question.  In the verinage demolitions, as in any CD, the glazing is removed first for safety.  Hence the air can escape though the window openings at each floor as the collapse progresses.
I know I answered the question because it was a rhetorical question, as the verinage demolition is a poor comparison because it doesn't exhibit the same squibs that the WTC did. The problem with the WTC, is that the squibs appear many floors below the collapse zone and disappear.

If it was compressed air, then air and debris would be continuously being pushed out and compressed from those 3 zones highlighted in the photo, as the collapse progresses, which it clearly doesn't. The fact these squibs appear and then disappear, then appear elsewhere and disappear proves beyond a doubt that it was not compressed air as it is not continuously escaping where it exits.

Edited by Stundie, 24 April 2013 - 11:39 AM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1520    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,202 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 24 April 2013 - 01:44 PM

View PostStundie, on 24 April 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

There is plenty of escape routes like out the sides and tops of the building collapse zone, as it was not air tight for it cause compressed air. lol
And if we needed any evidence that ignorance is bliss, this be the post. lol

For a start you didn't address any of the points I raised which disprove your theory that it was air.

Secondly, I do not see any squibs in the Verinage demolition appearing below the collapse zone like the 3 examples highlighted below at the WTC.
Posted Image

So unless you want to address the reasons why it can't be compressed air.
  • It can't be compressed air, for the simple reason that we would see the air and debris continuously being pushed out at each point as the collapse progresses as the air is being continuously compressed. What we see being expelled out of the sides of the building is a puff, in other words a short sharp ejection pushing out the air and then suddenly stopping even though the collapse continues supposedly building more pressure.
  • It can't be compressed air because at the point where it escaped, there would be an even bigger continuous puff being ejected out around the same areas as the pressure built up. Unless these areas were big enough to continuously decrease the pressure as the collapse continued, which would mean there would be no further placed needed for any more ejections, which evidently is not true because more of them continue to appear further down the building.
  • It can't be compressed air because we see these puffs come out some 40 plus floors below the collapse zone which then disappears, for another one to appear many floors above it and still below the collapse zone for that to disappear too as the collapse continues. Unless panto debunkers want to claim that after being expelled out of the side of the building, this compressed air did a complete U-turn and instead of escaping through it's original route, it travelled through the entire building only to escape elsewhere. Magic air! lol
  • It can't be compressed air because there are plenty of places for any trapped air to escape at the point of collapse, unless panto debunkers think the collapse points around the collapse zone was air tight
Why is there no compressed air in the verinage collapse happening below the collapse zone?? Is it because that any air compressed in the verinage demolition can escape at the collapse zone? And that the only air compressed is you talking out your butt....lol

Those are compressed air jets, not explosion plumes. BIG difference between the two.  It has already been proven that compressed air was responsible for the squibs and the fact there were no  sound of explosions as the WTC buildings underlines that fact.

Once again, those are compressed air jets, not plumes from explosions. Demolition experts didn't see any evidence of explosions in the videos either.

Edited by skyeagle409, 24 April 2013 - 01:48 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1521    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,821 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006

Posted 24 April 2013 - 01:48 PM

View PostStundie, on 24 April 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

I know I answered the question because it was a rhetorical question, as the verinage demolition is a poor comparison because it doesn't exhibit the same squibs that the WTC did. The problem with the WTC, is that the squibs appear many floors below the collapse zone and disappear.

If it was compressed air, then air and debris would be continuously being pushed out and compressed from those 3 zones highlighted in the photo, as the collapse progresses, which it clearly doesn't. The fact these squibs appear and then disappear, then appear elsewhere and disappear proves beyond a doubt that it was not compressed air as it is not continuously escaping where it exits.

They disappear because you can't see a jet of air unless it is carrying dust or other debris.  Why should there be much debris so far below the collapse zone?  A bit of broken window, a bit of loose office stuff, then it's just invisible clean air coming out.

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#1522    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,202 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 24 April 2013 - 01:52 PM

View PostStundie, on 24 April 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

I know I answered the question because it was a rhetorical question, as the verinage demolition is a poor comparison because it doesn't exhibit the same squibs that the WTC did.

It is the perfect comparison because 911 Truthers claimed the squibs were proof that explosives were used. The Verinage method has proven them wrong.

Quote

The problem with the WTC, is that the squibs appear many floors below the collapse zone and disappear.

Those are compressed air jets, which were formed as the building buildings collapsed and nothing to do with explosives. No one heard the sound of bomb explosions as the WTC buildings collapsed.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1523    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 24 April 2013 - 09:52 PM

View Postflyingswan, on 18 April 2013 - 06:45 PM, said:

Your logic is amazing, on a par with claiming that life is impossible on Earth because it might be too hot or it might be too cold but it could not possibly be just right.How exactly in your world does the extremely rapid pressure rise of an explosion manage to blow out an isolated window?

Of course many scientists have said that the balance of factors which make life on Earth possible is akin to a ‘miracle’.  It is certainly positive that you compare the official account on 9/11 to such a miracle.  So not only does the official story rely on a vast array of disparate and contentious explanations, but also those that are miraculous in their occurrence.  It would be better to accept the single fit all answer of false flag and demolition and be done with it.

But wait, I’d like to go into a little more detail of your theory.  Please explain how the resistance provided by thick, double-glazed windows, built into the structure, can be less than open lift shafts and stairwells.  There is no reason, provided the somewhat gradual pressure build-up necessary to your theory, that the former should explode out.

In contrast, an explosion which emanates from an isolated area of the core structure, and is perhaps forced down specific corridors (not all levels were open office space), rather than the all-encompassing collapse front, could indeed blow out isolated windows.

Also Stundie raised a very good point about the squib ejections reducing in pressure before the collapse front reaches the location.  This indicates not a continuous compressing of the air but an isolated pressure wave.  The squibs furthest below the collapse zone appear to show a white smoke which cannot be “debris” as you suggest.  The white smoke however could be the product of explosives.

Squib producing white smoke: -

Posted Image

As seen in this video: -



Thank you for helping to highlight that once again the official story at best follows a miracle and at worst the nonsensical, in opposition to the obvious; demolition.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#1524    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,202 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 25 April 2013 - 01:01 AM

View PostQ24, on 24 April 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

Of course many scientists have said that the balance of factors which make life on Earth possible is akin to a ‘miracle’.  It is certainly positive that you compare the official account on 9/11 to such a miracle.  So not only does the official story rely on a vast array of disparate and contentious explanations, but also those that are miraculous in their occurrence.  It would be better to accept the single fit all answer of false flag and demolition and be done with it.

But wait, I’d like to go into a little more detail of your theory.  Please explain how the resistance provided by thick, double-glazed windows, built into the structure, can be less than open lift shafts and stairwells.  There is no reason, provided the somewhat gradual pressure build-up necessary to your theory, that the former should explode out.

In contrast, an explosion which emanates from an isolated area of the core structure, and is perhaps forced down specific corridors (not all levels were open office space), rather than the all-encompassing collapse front, could indeed blow out isolated windows.

Also Stundie raised a very good point about the squib ejections reducing in pressure before the collapse front reaches the location.  This indicates not a continuous compressing of the air but an isolated pressure wave.  The squibs furthest below the collapse zone appear to show a white smoke which cannot be “debris” as you suggest.  The white smoke however could be the product of explosives.

Squib producing white smoke: -

Posted Image

As seen in this video: -



Thank you for helping to highlight that once again the official story at best follows a miracle and at worst the nonsensical, in opposition to the obvious; demolition.

Those jets of compressed air have nothing to do with explosives, which was evident because at the time the WTC buildings collapsed, no bomb explosions were heard. This video proved that beyond any doubt.

No explosions heard.



Edited by skyeagle409, 25 April 2013 - 01:06 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1525    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 25 April 2013 - 01:14 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 25 April 2013 - 01:01 AM, said:

Those jets of compressed air have nothing to do with explosives, which was evident because at the time the WTC buildings collapsed, no bomb explosions were heard. This video proved that beyond any doubt.

No explosions heard.

Already addressed.

Post #1510, 2nd paragraph.

:sleepy:

Please take the information onboard to avoid repeating the same mistakes over and over.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#1526    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,202 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 25 April 2013 - 01:17 AM

View PostQ24, on 25 April 2013 - 01:14 AM, said:

Already addressed.

Post #1510, 2nd paragraph.

:sleepy:

Please take the information onboard to avoid repeating the same mistakes over and over.

It was all very simple to under that any high school science student would have known.

Quote

I will mention that the collapsing building itself produced a noise level greater than that which would be produced by explosives if the seismic record is anything to go by, i.e. the sound of explosions would be drowned out by that of the collapsing building.  The early stage of collapse, prior to large debris reaching ground level, produced a reading in excess of even the plane impacts.  That means even the large boom of the plane impacts would have been drowned out had they occurred during the collapses.

You got to be kidding!!! Apparently, you have never heard real bomb explosions before because there was no way the collapse of the WTC buildings would have drowned out the sound of bomb explosions.



View PostQ24, on 25 April 2013 - 01:14 AM, said:

Already addressed.

Post #1510, 2nd paragraph.

:sleepy:

Please take the information onboard to avoid repeating the same mistakes over and over.

It was all very simple to under that any high school science student would have known.

Quote

I will mention that the collapsing building itself produced a noise level greater than that which would be produced by explosives if the seismic record is anything to go by, i.e. the sound of explosions would be drowned out by that of the collapsing building.  The early stage of collapse, prior to large debris reaching ground level, produced a reading in excess of even the plane impacts.  That means even the large boom of the plane impacts would have been drowned out had they occurred during the collapses.

You got to be kidding!!! Apparently, you have never heard real bomb explosions before because there was no way the collapse of the WTC buildings would have drowned out the sound of bomb explosions.





Edited by skyeagle409, 25 April 2013 - 01:34 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1527    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,202 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:23 AM

View PostQ24, on 17 April 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

Posted Image

That is a compressed air jet, which had nothing to do with explosives.

Quote

Squibs

Conspiracy theories are often built around anomalies which are difficult to prove either way. The "assumptionists" are convinced they know what the anomaly is. One such anomaly is the so called "Squibs".
They say this anomaly is an explosive charge going off and a sure sign of Controlled Demolition. It's often followed by more video of charges going off in real Controlled Demolitions. But if we examine the anomaly closely, we see these [would be] explosives work in reverse to an explosive blast. They tend to spurt out and then increase with time. An explosive works in reverse to this. Its strongest point is the moment the charge is set off. It doesn't increase its explosive strength with time. So what is this then? Why would debris jet out of windows far below the collapse?

It could be a number of things, by themselves or in combination. One reasonable explanation is a buildup of pressure caused by the compression of air between the floors as they pancaked, (Please read the link to explain the NIST / Pancaking issue) pushed debris out of the already broken windows and/or open vents. Another is falling debris like elevators or elevator parts/motors and/or columns free falling down the elevator shafts and slamming into lower floors creating debris. In a sense the floors are large plungers and the towers are just one big Syringe during the collapse.

During the pancake, the floors acted like a plunger in a Syringe. The towers skin and windows became the tube of the Syringe.  The increased pressure blew the windows out as each massive acre of floor compressed air between them.  It's said that the towers were about 95% air.  But not all the air went so easily out the window space.  There was just as much window as there was steel perimeter columns.  So the air takes the path of least resistance to the core.


The core is collapsing and thick debris is preventing the air from going up.  Its next path of least resistance would be to go down the core. The air pushed though the core any way it could and the pressure built up. It forced its way out on lower floors wherever it could.

According to the survivors of at least one tower, a hurricane wind blows through the staircase which is located in the core...

http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm






Edited by skyeagle409, 25 April 2013 - 04:26 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1528    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,064 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008

Posted 25 April 2013 - 05:16 AM

Best  statement " Zero similarities" Of a controlled demolition !  Does the word Zero mean anything any more? Like Zero proof that it was anything other than the two towers coming down due to the Two Aircraft and  resultant fires and gravity? Man what does it take to convince people of the Facts ? Well I guess that answers it self. People and Facts are like  Moon Bases. Theres Oh so many of them !

This is a Work in Progress!

#1529    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,821 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006

Posted 25 April 2013 - 01:57 PM

View PostQ24, on 24 April 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

Of course many scientists have said that the balance of factors which make life on Earth possible is akin to a 'miracle'.  It is certainly positive that you compare the official account on 9/11 to such a miracle.  So not only does the official story rely on a vast array of disparate and contentious explanations, but also those that are miraculous in their occurrence.  It would be better to accept the single fit all answer of false flag and demolition and be done with it.
You grasp on logic is getting worse.  All I mentioned was the right temperature for life, and there is a range of distances from the sun where the earth could be and still have the right temperature.  Nothing miraculous, planets have been discovered in the habitable zones of other stars, too.

Quote

But wait, I'd like to go into a little more detail of your theory.  Please explain how the resistance provided by thick, double-glazed windows, built into the structure, can be less than open lift shafts and stairwells.  There is no reason, provided the somewhat gradual pressure build-up necessary to your theory, that the former should explode out.
There is a lot of air being pushed down through the building, and not every floor is going to have the same number of open lift shafts and stairwells letting air in from above as letting air out below.  Anywhere that the flow is restricted, the pressure is going to build up, and only a few floors with the worst restrictions are necessary to produce the isolated window breaks seen in the videos.

Quote

In contrast, an explosion which emanates from an isolated area of the core structure, and is perhaps forced down specific corridors (not all levels were open office space), rather than the all-encompassing collapse front, could indeed blow out isolated windows.
Now who is scraping the barrel of likelihood?  Explosions designed to break the massive steel columns holding up the building, but too weak to damage an office wall?

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#1530    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 29 April 2013 - 12:16 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 April 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Those are compressed air jets, not explosion plumes.
Compressed air..lol

Don't you mean magical compressed air jets that travel around the building out of there own free will?? :blink:

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 April 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

BIG difference between the two.
Compressed air would continue to escape as the collapse progresses, which doesn't happen. Proving that it is not compressed air. lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 April 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

It has already been proven that compressed air was responsible for the squibs and the fact there were no  sound of explosions as the WTC buildings underlines that fact.
No it hasn't and your standards of proof are extremely low..lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 April 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Once again, those are compressed air jets, not plumes from explosions.
Once again, your failure to address all the reason why it can't be compressed air shows us all how you manage to doublethink your way around the obvious problems with your compressed air theory...lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 April 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Demolition experts didn't see any evidence of explosions in the videos either.
Danny Jowenko saw evidence of it in WTC7 and unlike Blanchard, he used to demolished buildings for a living.


There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.